Add myself to editors

[bitcoinwarrior1]

Hi @Arachnid, I was there during your devcon panel whereby you mentioned that you would like more EIP editors to help out.

Let me know if you need any further information before merging this PR.

[bitcoinwarrior1]

@Arachnid bump

[loredanacirstea]

@Arachnid , bump. You said there are no editor applications waiting - this is one. You also said:

If we had a list of would-be editors waiting, we'd add them now. #2166 (comment)

@James-Sangalli do you still want to volunteer as an editor?

[Arachnid]

@James-Sangalli Sorry we never got to this. Please let us know if you're still interested in acting as an editor.

[bitcoinwarrior1]

@loredanacirstea @Arachnid happy to help with some basic reviewing/merging of PRs.

Are there any particular criteria that I need to understand before merging something? I am already aware that merging is not dependant on the soundness or utility of a PR, just that the review period and syntax requirements are fulfilled.

In any case, PR merging can be reverted, so the damage potential is very limited.

[axic]

I think it would make sense laying out some rules regarding the selection process of editors and those rules should also apply to the current editors.

I personally have been reviewing EIPs by commenting and pinging people months before I was added as an editor. I was also pinging editors on https://gitter.im/ethereum/EIPs to merge PRs I thought were good to be merged. Perhaps this could be considered as my "trainee editor" period. I would encourage everyone to start reviewing and pinging people, because that shows their genuine interest and helps them get familiar with the process and the rules set out by EIP-1.

[axic]

@James-Sangalli while on topic, could you please fix your EIPs to be according to EIP-1? #1386 (comment) raised that ERC-1386 doesn't have a copyright statement, but in fact it is missing every single section required by EIP-1.

1387 and 1388 also fall under the same umbrella.