It is weird how anytime someone doesn’t agree with you and your actions you resort to calling them a narcissist.
I wonder if this is just your way of diverting your negative actions and attempting to remove your own faults at the expense of fake name calling.
To me, this whole topic’s nonsense, most SNS DAOs shouldn’t even be SNS DAOs.
That falls on the community to reject the proposal to the nns.
I wonder who has a lot of vp and approved/ funded a majority of these daos…
Got sidetracked my bad, lol… to answer your question… probs best way to prevent takeovers is verified identity.
i give up on this thread, brigaded again and the admins let the swamp win
I could feel the frustration in your replies. But yeah that would be a solution maybe a vp cap to users and daos the same way they cap treasury control
You seem to not be able to admit when you have done something wrong. Sure your goals are good for this ecosystem but the actions you are taking are trashing the community and destroying anything that doesn’t agree with you.
Always two sides to every story and there should be a middle ground.
LMAO, that’s how it works, if you want the DAO to work the way you expect, don’t dissolve and sell your neurons.No one is stopping you from buying more in advance because you are not optimistic about the development of DAO or you simply don’t have that much money.
This bit is kind of true to some extent. I think Web3 DAOs essentially favor the financially equipped.
Then dfinity either removes treasury restrictions and takes the approach that its the daos and users responsibility or they act and reduce the chances for adam to make these daos his playground.
For once, I don’t think Adam did anything wrong here. If the DAO were vulnerable to a 51% attack, I’d much rather it be Adam than someone from outside the ecosystem.
Early on dfinity decided to take action against daos draining their treasury as it was a negative look on the sns launchpad.
Now they turn a blind eye to their whale taking over sns projects. My call to action is for dfinity to either enact things to prevent these take overs or to remove their overreach on the daos treasury.
Yes, that is wrong from DFINITY side.
This is what draws me to my conclusion that either they act to prevent these takeovers or they remove over reach and follow the standard dyor for people investing into these daos.
You should have stated your purpose earlier. 
no, no one is concerned.
the launchpad doesn’t need to do anything. the actual projects in question could limit the individual icp contribution to a small percentage of the total tokens, which would make it difficult for a single person to amass influence. this would also show grassroots support for your project if you had lots of small contributors rather than a few big whales. of course, to accomplish this, the project would have to already have a good reputation with a working product that delivers value to the people, something most sns offerings have completely failed at.
I wanted to show people the hypocrisy in the group think here.
While everyone is okay with one user taking control of these projects they were the same people throwing tantrums when boom dao drained their treasury. Critical thinking is lacking lately.
DFINITY should focus on building great products and avoid expressing opinions in other ways.
I agree. That is why I have been vocal about them removing these treasury restrictions as it has them playing government over what is supposed to be a “Decentralized” organization
This is a decentralized government where capital becomes power. Is there any problem with that?