Right so this is Dfinity’s process not yours and you don’t define what this forum is used for
Feel free to submit a proposal though, nothing stops you
1 Like
DFinity is a contributor like any other. It should be able to do what it deems best without undue armtwisting and blackmail.
1 Like
Right, and it IS doing what it wants to
This is literally defined by Dfinity
and what you call arm twisting and blackmail, is literally exposure of what’s being talked about here
All of it is TRUE, are you saying it should be hidden and within walls where people are not aware?
Transparency is key to honest business.
The proposal is transparent. Now it will be put to a vote.
1 Like
There is no proposal.
Also its not transparent, hence the request for the information.
The proposal will come. Then we will vote Yes or No.
1 Like
Right and here we’re still in the process of discussing whether current way of doing this is the best before the proposal
Theres still a lot of stones unturned and we’re in the middle of doing this
I prefer a process where we do not censor proposals based on the fact that someone is still thinking, or still not aligned. We should let proposals be uploaded, then we vote. What we will become will be the sum total of the ideal and the non ideal things that we pass. But that will be us. We are not a web2 corporate that has to align upwards before passing decisions.
1 Like
This is EXACTLY why Dfinity has this process in place - to get community involvement
You are free to work with them to change this process if you feel its unbecoming of web 3
1 Like
Which part of the process do you believe should change? I think it is okay that they have refined their thoughts on how ckBTC should be designed, consulted on some aspects, probablt decided on their own on some other aspects. Final gate will be a vote by the community.
1 Like
They, out of the blue, dropped that Toniq will be the sole subscription provider for ckBTC and if this subscription isnt available, then no minting of ckBTC can happen.
No one knew about this till yesterday.
Today Im making everyone aware this is the current model ← Which I would assume is important for the vote (Though its pointless since Dfinity can override anyones vote by themselves alone, just like AWS i.e. Web 2)
1 Like
Not to mention the reason for rushing this is so we can “Join in the Ordinal craze” and sell ordinals
meanwhile, there is like no money in ordinals on a marketplace many many many times the size of us
Every proposal is okay. If I think that ordinals are important I will rush to submit a proposal, or make last minute changes, then you vote no if you think different. If I believe that I should go live with ckBTC with Toniq providing Chainanalysis, I could let you see that in the proposal, then you vote Yes or No. DFinity will use its own vote, and the vote of the community that trusts and delegates to it.
A proposal can be of any shape or form that the proposer decides it to be, then the community decides. There should be no centralised gate keepers in the forum bullying and armrwisting to see their kind of process followed. We should all wait for the vote, or make our own counter-proposals.
Right and we are still in the forum of discussion and this is important enough to create public awareness
Again if its TRUE how us it bullying or armtwisting?
Its. All. True.
if its not a problem, then its all fine right?
if its a problem, people will be aware to raise it as an issue
everyone wins.
There is only one truth. That there is/will be a proposal, and that it will be put to a vote. Everything else is subjective.
1 Like
Right so thats the reason for discussion, just like when there are elections, there are debates
This isnt new, thats all thats happening.
Hi Bob!
Thank you for your detailed post. I think it’s great that you’ve put Toniq forward for doing this and I understand why you want ckBTC shipped really fast.
From what you’ve said it sounds like there is no financial reason to be a KYT provider which means that there is unlikely to be anyone else who goes for it. I’ve got a meeting with Chainalysis at 11.30 but I imagine they will tell me the price and that will be a no-go for us.
What happens if Toniq gets bought out? OpenSea, or some VC firm comes in and give you crazy money for your project… what then? They might not have the same view as yourself and could just switch off the service?
What if Bob and Steve want to live like bond villains and use KYT services as a weapon. (Like Putin and nordstream)… I know these are unlikely scenarios but we should design core services to cover these events.
Also what is the setup of the KYT. Does the KYT canister call chainalaysis directly using your API key or does the call go to a Toniq server as a middle man? If there is a middle server then that creates another point of failure which should be discussed.
If there has to be a single entity… then why is that not Dfinity? I imagine there has to be a legal/ political reason for this? If so… let’s hear it.
If the mega-minds have considered all the options then I’m happy to go with this decision… but from a community perspective it seems like there has been a lot of ‘closed door’ discussions and decisions made which makes this forum post a bit pointless.
3 Likes
Further to this… there is also the Internet Computer Association. Could they not get a API key if Dfinity want to remain ‘at a distance?’
2 Likes
It is damaging if is done sensationally (the political way). See post below by NS01 that takes a more inquisitive format to clarify concerns rather than chasing clout points.
IIRC the ICA is not what it was intended to be; a separate entity comprised of node providers and other contributors that is distinct from the foundation in its management and operation.
I believe Dom acknowledged they ran into obstacles trying to get it started so it’s currently under the same management as DF. I could be wrong though. I’ll try to find that post in a bit.
Edit: This is Dom’s response from: What is the Internet Computer Association? - #50 by dominicwilliams
For the record. The ICA is meant to be a members organization, but there are two challenges that have put its development on the back burner: (1) there are far more important things for the team to be working on right now, (2) we could not transfer legal ownership of ICP to the ICA for tax reasons; essentially that it would involve a gift, and in Zürich, where DFINITY is based, a substantial gift tax would be involved. So for now it controls voting neurons for security purposes (distribution of keys etc) and that’s it. We have ideas about how to fix this, and develop the organization, but it’s going to be a major undertaking, and we don’t have the bandwidth right now. Period.
3 Likes