## Chapter 7 — The 2-of-3 mint stays a pass, not a new threshold ### Lesson map Lesson 07. Map, example, EX053. ```mermaid flowchart TD A["Prose: a multi-signature arrangement"] --> B["Source: mint held by a 2-of-3 multisig"] B --> C{"May a note retune that threshold?"} C -->|No| D["Leave 2-of-3 as the pass"] C -->|Yes| E["No other threshold is written"] ``` The mint row is already met. Meeting it does not invite a new design. ### Logical drawing ```text mint row source marks it met wording in the source: 2-of-3 multisig prose nearby: multi-signature arrangement not in the file key holders' names a different threshold a fresh run ``` ### Learning outcomes After this chapter, you should be able to: 1. Say what the mint row claims. 2. Keep both the prose wording and the 2-of-3 wording. 3. Refuse a new threshold that this file does not contain. ### 7.1 Two descriptions, one passing row. A multi-signature arrangement means a privileged action waits for more than one key. The checklist's first row is specific: the mint role is held by a 2-of-3 multisig, and the source marks that row met. Chapter 4's prose says "multi-signature arrangement" and does not restate the numbers. Both descriptions belong to the same pass. Two of three means the mint runs when two of the three designated keys agree. The manuscript never names the people or the devices that hold those keys, so a note cannot fill those names in. Changing the row to one of one, or to three of five, or to any other pair of numbers, would be a different control. The source does not contain that edit, and the print does not list the mint row among the gaps. A pass is evidence about this setup. It is not permission to retune the setup in the margin. The script that reads the row stays unread as a new program. ### 7.2 Worked example Keep the threshold that is written. Do not design another one on the answer line. | Proposed wording | In the file? | Decision | |---|---|---| | "Mint sits with a multi-signature arrangement." | Chapter 4's prose | May stay | | "The source says a 2-of-3 multisig and marks it met." | The checklist row | May stay | | "Name the three key holders." | No names | Refuse | | "Move the row to a 3-of-5 threshold." | No such row | Refuse | > **Synthetic case.** The 2-of-3 mint is a synthetic control on a test setup. No key is printed. ### Errors and limits A passing mint row can still sit beside unmet rows. The pass does not close the timelock, the access review, or the monitoring gap. ### Apply - **EX053 — Which threshold?** Someone proposes rewriting the mint row from 2-of-3 to another threshold because the row already passes. What threshold stays, and what must the note not add? *Rubric:* 3 = the mint row stays a met 2-of-3 multisig; the prose may still say multi-signature arrangement; no key holder is named; no other threshold is written; do not edit the script;; 2 = 2-of-3 stays and no new threshold is added;; 1 = the pass only;; 0 = none. ### Continue studying — lesson 07 (chapter 07 of 20) [← Chapter 06](#ch-06) · [Course chapter index](../SUBJECTS.md) · [Chapter 08 →](#ch-08) Continue to the next authored lesson. ## Worked answers **EX053.** No. Mint stays a 2-of-3 multisig pass. Do not change the threshold. Do not edit the script.