oh he wants more control now after his friends drained the treasury
I sympathise with Wenzel, truly a victim here.
As a principle, I wrote that withdrawing money from the treasury should be followed by a solid procedure. If you remember, in the İC-x project, a proposal was put to vote to withdraw 150,000 İCP for software development and marketing issues. In other words, they withdrew 150,000İCP without following any rules. THIS shooting shouldn’t be this easy without any obligation.
1 Like
What are you babbling about now @CatPirate? Do you have a relevant contribution to the conversation?
Is there something I wrote that makes you think I disagree with what you are saying? The idea behind a decentralized SNS neuron and/or an SNS endowment neuron that holds the treasury is to create a solid procedure for making distributions and to enable that procedure to be executed in smaller chunks after services are provided. I think that is in alignment with what you are suggesting.
3 Likes
I wrote it to make what I said clearer. I agree with you
Wenzel Bartlett via Internet Computer Developer Forum <notifications@dfn.discoursemail.com>, 28 Eki 2023 Cmt, 23:45 tarihinde şunu yazdı:
1 Like
I’m really curious how many people who invested in these projects feel like the funds were actually stolen, or that the contract they agreed to was actually breached? Have any of them contacted the local authorities to report the “theft”, or consulted with a legal expert regarding the contract?
I think safety measures are great, and there are some good ideas in this thread, but as you can see by looking at the current regulations in the U.S., sometimes you stifle innovation under the guise of “protecting investors.” In these two specific instances (ICX and BoomDAO), I’d like to know how many actual investors in those projects feel like they need more protection?
2 Likes
I kind of feel like that too. These SNS projects are all very early projects, driven by the devs, and I am inclined to follow the devs that I trust. Always a gamble, but trying to hamstring the SNS DAOs with all kinds of rules that prevents spending the investments towards innovations will be counterproductive.
I also do not like the idea of turning the SNS into a grant or contract style process to spend the money. That will also slow down progress.
For more mature projects it makes sense, but not for these early stage projects.
5 Likes
Thanks @Caesar, but this comment is off topic and I have flagged it as such. I hope others will do the same so this discussion can stay focused.
The SNS isn’t securities right?
The issue is initial allocation of tokens.
Teams shouldn’t be able to allocate tokens to themselves.
The SNS is a decentralized autonomous organization tool but we all are so greedy we throw away the decentralized part for profit and created scams.
Anyways I don’t even care anymore.considering community was against ICX and Boom DAO. Clearly there are whales in ICP that control everything and aren’t paying attention.
The money wasn’t stolen. It was donated. ICX dev gave him self a salary for the rest of his life and he can play building out an app forever.
With the money out of the dao he has no accountability.
When you donate money to someone, you don’t get to decide what they do with it. If you want to have a say in what they do with it, it’s not a donation.
If you’re referring to securities in the U.S., I don’t know about ICX, but BoomDAO geoblocked and put in their white paper that U.S. Citizens could not participate. So theoretically, no one in the U.S. should have been harmed.
1 Like
Thanks for the ideas! I don’t think we have explicitly looked at this approach before.
Just some initial thoughts:
As you say, this would mean that
once the ICP goes in as a stake, then it can never come out
I am not sure if this is what SNSs would want for their NNS neurons. For example, if some SNSs would like to stake some ICP just for a year and then later use them for other things.
I would propose that before we decide on any development, it would be best to also compare this to other potential solutions, for example where the SNS controls the NNS neuron a bit more directly (e.g., via SNS proposal).
As you say, maybe the development investment would not be very large in your solution. I wonder whether this can also be true for other solutions. Moreover, I wonder whether using the manage neuron proposals is the easiest for end-users to understand as it is a bit a complex mechanism that requires understanding some details of both neurons and proposals to fully grasp.
5 Likes
I agree this is a challenge. I assume SNS teams would be up to the task since they are developers. I also assume a UI could be created to make this more user friendly.
I assume SNS teams would be up to the task since they are developers.
You might be right. However, I think in the best case we can find a design where all actions (or as many as possible) are understandable also by the end-users as otherwise they need to trust the developers (which is against the idea that no centralised trust is needed in the DAO).
But I agree that a good UI and some additional explanations can go a long way!
2 Likes
Maybe firstly we just update following topic: “All Topics” to “All Except Motion, and Transfer SNS treasury funds”?
I would argue that if our long-term goal is decentralization as community influence on developers, this can only be done through Motion proposals (presenting the will of the people, like referendums) and control over their access to treasury funds (partially payments for completed milestones, as it works in the case of e.g. the EU National Reconstruction Plan after COVID-19).
The long-term development plan should be detailed and included in each subsequent proposal to create an SNS-DAO, and the community should be able to independently assess its implementation and decide on cash flows to developers.
The US was not geoblocked in the sale.
Proposal: 124292 - ICP Dashboard (internetcomputer.org)
Edit: i do see in the proposal where they stated areas were blocked. Shouldn’t parameters have been included in the payload to reflect this?
Proposal: 124770 - ICP Dashboard (internetcomputer.org)
like the restricted countries and ISO codes found in the payload here.
I thought I had tried to test participation through the NNS and it said I was blocked, but it’s possible I was mistaken if it was not included in the payload.
In my mind, using a real world example, it’s like posting a no trespassing sign at the edge of your property, but not putting up a fence line. Is the sign alone enough? Some people think so, some don’t. 
I think telling people they can’t participate is enough, then let them decide whether or not they want to ignore that at their own risk.
yeah I agree. I am one of those that thinks the sign is enough in relation to property. however here we are talking about money. So not utilizing parameters specifically included for such blocks is like saying “we dont want you but we are glad to accept your money”
France was blocked because the founder’s French, go figure.