Actually could I join the CatPirate / ZackDS / Phasma / LightningLad / Ivan / Accumulating.ICP brigade? How much do you guys get paid for posting constant FUD?
1 Like
depends on how much did you drink already and how much do you got to spend, kidding ofc. FYI just run the proposal we will all vote YES. Surely all SNS DAO must be able to set at least 888 years. 
1 Like
I post constant FUD? Would appreciate some examples if you have them handy.
3 Likes
I wish I got paid for talking about all the silly things DFINITY does! I’d have as much ICP as you!
I was actually considering applying for a DFINITY grant now that you mention it though… Thinking of hosting some type of talk show aiming to raise awareness of the dangers of centralized blockchains & networks!
Jokes aside, it’s quite clear the only reason you’re in the thread is to distract from the fact of the matter - being that DFINITY can’t articulate any valid reasoning to dismiss the Periodic Followee Confirmation Proposal, so they’ve decided to outright void it & ignore it.
You are way to transparent Borovan.
Absolute Majority Weight Proposal Draft - #85 by lara was this not the answer you needed?
They have a track record of preventing moves to steal SNS funds.Do you hate the Avengers?
You’re pretty good at following conversations;
1 Like
Yawn. So you’re looking for some sort of loophole or something. tl;dr. Why don’t you submit a new proposal?
Borovan, you’re making me regret commending your conversation following skills!
There is only one party looking for a loophole, being DFINITY, which is abundantly clear upon review of this thread - thanks for pointing that out.
I am simply trying to see out the enactment of proposals that have already passed.
This discrepancy in participation rates is an incentive to submit spam proposals for the purpose of receiving higher voting rewards […] This proposal aims to remove this incentive […]”
The situation has changed, so let’s revisit it with another proposal. Unless @ysyms wants to fire up the spam bot 3000 again?
I’d encourage you to educate yourself on why what you’re saying is incorrect. It might be helpful if you read this thread before commenting on it!
I smell “other motives”…aka “BS”
1 Like
Please enlighten me on what my ulterior motives for decentralizing the blockchain might be🤦🏻♂️
I don’t understand how that claim can be made, when I am going out of my way to sculpt the optimal scenario for DFINITY, post followee reset - regardless of the fact that a proposal has already passed (about a year and a half ago), and should have been implemented.
hmmm maybe your motive is to slowly undermine Dfinitys contribution to the IC.
Things have changed. A lot. Lets see how many people agree with your BS theories today. Make a proposal and lets see what happens. continually resurrecting this thread is a poor substitute for decentralised governance
2 Likes
What a theory - that’s definitely why I went out of my way to create an amendment to their proposed design flaws, rather than pushing the proposal as it passed, and the NNS called for.
Let’s not forget this proposal is specifically optimized to assist DFINITY is regaining their voting power - as it was cited as the concern with the Periodic Followee Confirmation proposal (that has already passed).
Are you saying DFINITYs contributions to the Internet Computer are reliant on them having super majority control? Furthermore, are you trying to justify the indefinite retention of a self assigned 99.8% centralized super majority? I could have sworn DFINITY refers to themselves as just one of many contributors - if they’re the best, they should have no issue regaining their self assigned voting power.
You can call this proposal a “BS Theory” all you’d like - but that doesn’t change the fact that none of you have been able to articulate how this would have prevented spam. It quite clearly has the sole benefit of decentralization, and only would have enhanced spam at the time of proposal (which has since been amended). Clearly DFINITY didn’t do their due diligence, or only considered the inflation to their personal rewards when voting - and we’re now trying to work backwards.
I find it hilarious that you’re all so quick to try to void the proposal, which passed via NNS over a year ago, because you don’t like the outcome. A proposal was made, and it was passed.
You say that pursuing a proposal that has passed is a “poor substitute for decentralized governance”, yet you’re purposefully ignorant of the fact that this has been passed via the governance mechanism, and is actively circumvented - because DFINITY is just now realizing they don’t get inflated rewards in exchange for losing self assigned voting power (I’m not entertaining the spam thing anymore - I’ve made it abundantly clear that none of you can articulate how that stopped spam. Why? Because it enhanced it.).
How many times does a proposal have to pass before it’s valid? Or is it only valid if DFINITY likes it?
Seeming more like centralized governance to me.
1 Like
You can’t win with people like you. You’ll always spin things to suit your own agenda, always create a false narrative and try to manipulate it. I’m sure there’s some term in psychology for you.
I voted for this when it came out, and now I’d vote the opposite way because it doesn’t make sense any more.
Why do you have to continually unearth this proposal? What’s the agenda, I want to know. I can have a good guess but I’d like you to tell me.
2 Likes
The irony. I’d encourage anyone reading this in hindsight, to read the entirety of this thread.
Because of the fact you can’t address any of my points - you’ve simply resorted to attacking my character. Thinking about it though, it has not only been me - but anyone to criticize DFINITY within this thread.
You should explore looking at things with an objective mindset! I’ll be waiting for a response to what Ive said in the meantime - although we all know why none of you want to respond to what I’ve said;
Well I am guilty of attacking your character, because frankly it’s awful.
Just this entire concept is done. Stick a fork in it. Why are you so obsessed with a proposal that was considered, passed, dealt with, and now not even slightly applicable to the current state of affairs.
You’re like the property developer who finds a loophole in the planning permission for a housing estate in the 80s and wont shut up about it because it’s your ticket to riches.
Move on, what else are you interested in?
1 Like
I didn’t know you are the one who makes the rules for the NNS now as well? Mind telling me what the expiration date for a proposal is?
The proposal was considered, passed, is on the roadmap and indefinitely pushed back (not dealt with), and has been acknowledge by the DFINITY foundation as a necessary priority in the past.
While you all want to walk back on that now, that does not change the course of events to date.
I’m glad we’ve established you have no other talking points.
You should do some research, educate yourself, and come back with an informed opinion! Maybe then you’ll be able to adequately contribute to the conversation!
1 Like
So you’re basically scared of a new proposal because if it gets shot down you lose your platform / agenda.
Im calling you out as being full of BS and having an ulterior motive. Why would you care so much about this proposal?
Is it because somebody close to you wants to slowly chip away at DFinity’s voting power?
1 Like