DFINITY Foundation’s vote on Governance proposal #80970 (“Spam proposal”) and #86639 ("Temperature Check")

[diegop]

@Johnchiby

Did we have a “spam for rewards” problem at genesis? If no, then what I’m saying is that ICP Maximalist created the proposal(s) that started the “spam for rewards” problem.

Good question. The problems did not start at Genesis but very soon after. ICP maximalist had nothing to do with that. In fact, some users actively created proposals just for rewards and wrote their intent in the forum and proposals.

Here is an example post from May 2022 (6 months ago before the proposals in question):

Blatant Spamming Rewards

Blatant Spamming Rewards The NNS has a spamming problem and although there have been attempts to rectify this situation there has been none. Therefore I would like to see the NNS be able to reclaim any and all rewards given to spamming proposals. It’s not like we don’t know who they are as they are always rejected and this was the comment made by one: This is NNS’s problem, even if I don’t send it, someone else will send it. At present if we as a community reject a proposal on the belief tha…

I don’t see how ICP maximalist could have created the spam problem so I’m very certain they did not. I’m not even certain they existed when spam started (could be wrong about this).

Tbh, I’m a bit concerned (not your fault or responsibility so not blaming you) about the ICPM scapegoating for spam when many other entities have submitted spam proposals, but in reality the true problem is that the Tokenomics incentivized it.