I voted to adopt since the documents meet the expectations even though as Louise pointed out that they are not linked in the correct part of the wiki. Unless there is an easy fix for that probably a new proposal would be the correct step.
3 Likes
Voted to adopt proposal 133135 since the requirements are met according to what was outlined here.
1 Like
An update was submitted (not accepted yet) to the forum, to link Protocol16 / Philip Hur self-declaration documents to the Self-Declaration overview.
If this edit gets accepted within time, I vote to adopt proposal 133135.
1 Like
The wikipage for Philip Hur has been added, and hashes check out okay. Link can be found here.
4 Likes
I vote to reject Proposal 133135.
While I have verified that the hashes provided for the self-declaration and proof of identity documents match, the proposal has several issues that must be addressed before I can support it.
- Proposal Name and Self-Declaration Mismatch : The proposal is for Protocol16 , but the self-declaration is under the name Philip Hur , which creates confusion about whether this is a company or an individual submission. This needs to be clarified before submission to avoid any ambiguity.
- Document Links : The links provided for the self-declaration and proof of identity do not point to actual files, which makes verification difficult. It’s worth noting that this issue seems to stem from a lack of clear instructions, which should be addressed for future proposals. Correctly functioning links are a core requirement for transparency and ease of review, and this remains a significant issue in the current submission.
- Proposal Completeness Upon Submission : I believe proposals should be correct and complete upon submission. While I understand all documents have now been provided, these issues should have been resolved before submission. A complete and accurate proposal is critical for ensuring the process is clear and consistent.
- Broader Process Critique : I strongly support developing tools to automate the verification of proposals, but this cannot be done if essential details such as correct links and documentation are missing from the payload. These tools would improve the efficiency and reliability of the process, but this proposal does not meet the necessary requirements to enable such improvements.
3 Likes
Thanks for your help with this, @SvenF !
Hi @timk11 , thanks for voting to adopt the proposal! I am pursuing this as an individual. Let me know if you have any other questions.
1 Like
Dear all, cross posting this message for visibility
2 Likes
Hi everyone,
Cross posting this information here for your visibility and as instructed here.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Hi community, below is my review for proposal #134015. Based on the feedback of @cryptoschindler , I was going to post this review in the same thread where the announcement was made, but that is no longer possible as the thread is closed. So, I am posting here for visibility.
Proposal #134015 Review — Louise | Aviate Labs
Vote: ADOPT
Reason: All review criteria (please see below) have been met.
Summary: If accepted, proposal #134015 will register a new Node Provider on the IC, with Node Provider name “Decentralized Entities Foundation” and Node Provider ID “w4buy-lgwzr-pccs7-huzhh-qqnws-rns75-iaoox-jolrm-xs2ra-vdu3o-2qe”.
Review:
- I confirm that a forum introduction by the New NP was made here.
*Note: This should have been posted in the New Node Provider Proposals (this)
forum thread by convention. However, this is not explicitly stated in the documentation. So for me, this is acceptable. - I also confirm that the self-declaration and identity documents are uploaded on the wiki and can be found here.
- When checking locally, the hashes of both documents match the hashes that are in the proposal.
- I also confirm that this entity can be found in the Geneva Chamber of Commerce Registry here.
Thanks!
5 Likes
1 Like
Proposal 134015
Vote: Adopt
Reason: A suitable forum introduction is provided. The required documents are provided and the document hashes match those given in the proposal. A chamber of commerce link is also provided.
2 Likes
Proposal #134015 Review — Roald | Aviate Labs
Vote: ADOPT
Reason to adopt: the proposal satisfies all necessary review criteria.
Review:
Forum introduction was posted here.
Self-declaration and identity documents were posted here.
The entity was found in an official registry here.
The hashes of the documents match the hashes in the proposal: checked with Appdevtools’ Checksum Calculator
Self-declaration
Reported sha256-hash: 38734075a8577fc9e1d1ded846b41050f1f0255d5fefad747a9e5660a1c2b67f
Identity Proof:
Reported sha256-hash: db50f9440a1c3d8318687afa17ec20c1b3af211eb52ce37cfab4a45ea2466f7c
2 Likes
Proposal 134015
Vote: ADOPT
Reason: The proposal followed all the guidelines set for adding a new node provider.
- The forum introduction post was made by the proposer.
- Both the Self declaration and Identity Proof documents were uploaded on the wiki
- The hashes of both documents were verified suuccessfuly
- A chamber of commerce link was also provided in the wiki
2 Likes
Proposal #134015
Vote: Adopted
Reason: It has all the necesary documnets and both the self-declaration documentation and the proof of identity hash is a match. Documents Link.
As required a forum intro can be found here.
A new proposal 134333 to Update config of Node Operator: nvocp is live.
Hi all 
Proposal #134333 Review — Quint | Aviate Labs
Vote: REJECT
Review:
- Validate Data
As the second node id (l7jrv-cork3-yugm-545hs-bn3sa-sedzb-y4w2t-kbfyn-5ughu-ccr32-nqe) in the proposal does not exist and not does match any node of node provider Bitmoon (mjnyf-lzqq6-s7fzb-62rqm-xzvge-5oa26-humwp-dvwxp-jxxkf-hoel7-fqe) I will vote to reject proposal 134333.
2 Likes
Hello,
I’m just updating the rewards to the existing node-id nvocp-jlbys-d44wi-od3pv-iws4n-2nll3-73hqk-koh72-3obvg-kt5v3-fae.
Maybe I’m wrong ?
Thx
Hey, where did you get the second node id that you used in the proposal ?
Rewards were set for 6hqi5 with the adopted proposal 131057 from 2024-07-16.
Now you specified the 2 node id’s as :
- 6hqi5-ctyoo-qijwz-dtvwo-g5puo-yaftz-dmaid-rambc-li5dx-q46y2-sae
- l7jrv-cork3-yugm-545hs-bn3sa-sedzb-y4w2t-kbfyn-5ughu-ccr32-nqe
Voted to reject Proposal #134333.
As discussed the second node needs to be added/ onboarded first with another proposal and only after that is approved can rewards be set. Hopefully this time the resubmitted proposal will be correct.
I’m in the egdoo networks datacenter with the node provider id mjnyf-lzqq6-s7fzb-62rqm-xzvge-5oa26-humwp-dvwxp-jxxkf-hoel7-fqe.
I added one node 6hqi5-ctyoo-qijwz-dtvwo-g5puo-yaftz-dmaid-rambc-li5dx-q46y2-sae earlier this year and now i’m adding a second one in the same datacenter.