In your Alice proposal from yesterday, you pointed out that you were chatting with him about it. You are one of the 5 people who will understand how these settings work.
Hey ALICE community. This is Wenzel Bartlett from the CodeGov ALICE neuron.
…
My recommendation is that we reject proposal 30. It is important to understand the history of how we arrived at the current fee. The transaction fee was set to 5 ALICE to ensure that the ALICE token is deflationary overall. Robert proposed this transaction fee in proposal 9, which came after he recommended the increase in the governance rewards and the max dissolve delay to incentivize long-term staking.
proposal 9 full text:
In the BOB Telegram chat, King_Valhalla05 suggested raising the ledger fee to 5 ALICE
Alice DAO was proposed 2025-01-07T19:07:02.203Z
Your response is 2h 16m later 2025-01-07T21:23:36.594Z
Somehow, you found out about the post, checked all the yaml config options, thought about them, discussed it with the CodeGov team, they checked it, agreed, and you wrote your lengthy post. Just under 2h and 16m.
Adding your stamp of approval and voting in the NNS accept on this weird anti-decentralization setup. On top of that, offering users to follow your neuron.
And now being against fixing it..
A ‘dot fun’ project should have a max 6-month lock time, 25% age bonus, and a max dissolve delay of 100%. (Like other DAOs) You accepted something that is definitely not fun and normal users wouldn’t find - a very good offer to go for any meaningful voting power. This isn’t the particle accelerator, it’s “alice dot fun”. The whole configuration is made to discourage people from locking for max dissolve delay, because the rewards are too low to make sense. You accepted that pretty fast.
Not to mention, during the last month, you have been trying to defend all that is wrong in the ecosystem, employing spam and confusion to make sure nobody has the time to read about these problems. [Proposal to upgrade WaterNeuron voting system]