I find it strange that your beef is with leo and enzo getting nodes and where they get money from when you take “director loans” to fund your pursuit of control.
Anyways you are always able to engage in governance conversations within the dao if you actually care about your opinion being heard. The dao will never be forced to just follow your votes because you say so.
This goes for anyone as well. Get active within the community have your voice heard and who knows you might convince members to vote your way. Democracy at its finest
It turns out that every time you urge people to vote for your proposal, that’s a toss-up too. When you organize your little community that you think should vote for your proposals - that’s a toss-up too. When you buy more than 50% of the tokens of some DAO and then vote the way you want - that’s also rigging.
One “ok” clicked by retail users is needed for the CEX to automatically convert millions of ICP into nICP and give WTN voting power.
Not necessarily super bad, except when someone controls WTN and also has a lot of NPs. Very likely all the decent NPs will be removed once WTN gains a lot of voting power and the 3 WTN neurons to vote howerver they want with no skin in the game and using retail funds.
So far after evaluating many factors, the only solution seems to be reducing the vp of <2 year neurons.
Tell me about it, I’m very interested.
But besides that, answer the question… Does DAO have the right to be self-centered and think only about himself and not about the ecosystem and other players?
Temporarily will decrease apy until more icp is placed into the canister controlled neurons to make up for the difference in the regular vp allocation.
Actually, I agree with this take, but not for the reason that you think.
The result of reducing the VP of canister controlled neurons will actually be, They will just change the protocol to keep the neurons split. Or split up the 8 year neuron into smaller ones. (I think).
That’s why I believe the fundamental problem is with canister controlled neurons themselves. I don’t see a good solution. maybe someone smarter than me (everyone else here) wants to come up with a better idea.
Reduction to 3mo allows CEXes to auto stake a lot more without a danger of being bankrun. The whole liquid staking solution instead of neuron solution is so CEXes share these tokens and instead of risking one CEX going illiquid, all CEXes need to be bankrun to actually go illiquid.
If this proposal gets accepted, it may be one of the last proposals on the NNS where all our votes matter.
The whole setup is going to bring ICP sub 1$ and everyone diluted heavily. You will have everyone who has no skin in the game profiting from it.
Everything always has external factors. Everything is always contained in something and interacts with something. At the same time, everything can always be self-sufficient and act in their own interests. The DAO is part of the ecosystem and it makes no sense for it to destroy its soil, its foundation. But it has the right to think about itself and those who belong to it…through its own management mechanisms. The fact that you are afraid of DAO is not a problem of DAO. and the specifics of your condition. In such a situation, having no facts of a real threat and trying to play a non-hypothetical advance, it is more reasonable to create a counterweight rather than trying to destroy someone’s brainchild consisting of the interests / desires of many people.
