I was checking the licenses on github. And it seems like it’s not even possible to read the licenses as the following urls are down:
1 Like
It must be incredibly frustrating to have a major holder voting “No” seemingly just for the fun of it. That’s probably why so many projects participated in their own swap, to avoid all the Borovan drama.
Lol painting me helping the ecosystem as a bad thing. If it wasn’t for me funding the SNS it would be dead.
KongSwap, GoldDAO, DecideAI, Nuance, Catalyze have nothing to worry about. I’m in touch with the founders and will support the projects for as long as I can.
3 Likes
So the issue only seems to occur with the projects you don’t manage? How very convenient. Perhaps it’s all in your head.
No, I don’t manage these projects at all. Stop trying to paint a different picture.
1 Like
I think those are the same that the licenses here: ic/licenses at master · dfinity/ic · GitHub
2 Likes
How do we get into this selected group?
You have to be listed in @wpb’s post above.
3 Likes
Hey @wpb, can you please edit the post and add Seers? Thanks!
2 Likes
Ok easy for me as I won’t have to update my post!
3 Likes
I want nfidw to succeed (im a holder)
My suggestion to the team would be: @dostro
-
more transparency with progress/updates. Its not obvious to me from using the dapp what updates have been made since launch. This does not instill confidence. (Meanwhile competing services such as oisy have shown regular improvements to ux and capability of the product)
-
reach out to neurons fund investors and ask them to get off their butts and vote.
I find it amazing that you continue to ban evade and create drama for fun
How does renaming a dao to “swamp dao” help the ecosystem as well how does insider trading help the community?
This is good to know. Thank you for sharing @borovan. I see that you didn’t list ICVC and NFID Wallet as SNS projects that you are willing to protect. Have you posted anywhere why you have concerns about them? Would you please provide a link? I would like to learn more.
Currently, I would like to better understand why you voted to reject NFID proposal 18. That proposal is simply trying to comply with the new features that DFINITY is rolling out to assign the existing custom NFID proposals to an SNS topic, which is part of the Neon milestone on the Internet Computer Roadmap as described here.
Hey @aterga, @Andre-Popovitch @lara, @bjoernek perhaps this is a good reason to hold off on implementing the SNS Topics Plan. There is at least one SNS that is attempting in good faith to comply with the action required by DFINITY to assign topics, but they are being blocked by a single individual (Adam) who owns enough voting power to ensure critical proposals are rejected for currently unknown reasons. If you look at the proposal history for NFID, this pattern of rejecting proposals started with proposal 13. There has been no explanation for this voting pattern so far and it appears that NFID has a reason to worry about Adam because they are not on his protected list of SNS projects.
1 Like
I’ve already provided an probable explanation above why approximately 16% of the available voting power in the NFID SNS is not voting. That’s 40% of the voting power that you are currently characterizing as lazy voters.
I haven’t looked into it yet, but NFID had VC investors before they initiated their SNS. Those VCs received a considerable token allocation in the decentralization swap. It is well known that many VCs in this ecosystem will not participate in SNS governance with their tokens for very similar legal and/or tax reasons to the reasons why the largest Neuron’s Fund participants (which is likely DFINITY) do not participate in SNS governance. Hence, I believe your assumption that NFID suffers from lazy voters is misguided. I suspect the percentage of lazy voters is very small.
I too am a holder of NFID and want to see the SNS succeed. However, Adam’s actions does appear to be holding the NFID SNS hostage at the moment and it would be good to understand why directly from Adam instead of making assumptions. At the moment, it appears that the rules defined for critical proposals are working against the best interests of the NFID SNS. The point of an SNS is to achieve decentralized control of the application, but it appears that the fate if NFID resides in the hands of one person who is able to exert his influence with only 20.63% total NFID voting power.
2 Likes
Let’s also be honest. Adam has no issues starving projects to create his own monopoly.
For example he is the largest owner of Kong swap and is now forcing a team out of the ecosystem to let Kong absorb them.
The debate of whether sonic is a scam or not does not matter when you have a whale killing any chance of it not being seen as a scam
1 Like
I didn’t call it a scam. It’s been years and nothing works. I’m calling Bitfinity a scam, yes definitely.
2 Likes
This i agree with.
Adam could you possibly enlighten us? Other than that it is a less mature product than oisy what gripe do you have with the nfidw team?
What does the team need to do to gain your support going forward?
1 Like
Look at my reply above. Adam publicly stated a history of holding projects hostage. This is just because He doesn’t like the product they have.
I imagine Adam has no real reason for his actions besides he doesn’t like them