Proposal to Remove The Fools Court as a Named Neuron


I would like to submit a proposal to remove The Fools’ Court as a named neuron on the NNS.

I posted an announcement on my personal Twitter page in February stating that I wasn’t going to be actively voting anymore and I haven’t found anyone who is willing to take over management of the neuron. I also question if it’s really appropriate to hand it over to just anyone. I’m open to feedback and suggestions for what to do if the proposal is rejected.

I’ll leave this post up for the weekend and I’ll submit the proposal on Monday. I will also update this post with the neuron ID I use to make the proposal.

I appreciate everyone who supported us and I apologize for any inconvenience this causes our followers. We ask that you please help us spread the word on social media so others will know to update their settings. Personally I recommend following ICDevs for all topics.

TFC isn’t going anywhere and our mission stays the same. We just want to focus on our development efforts and believe that will have a greater impact in the long term. Thank you.


I have mixed feelings about named neurons but that aside, this post brings up an interesting quirk:

Stale/abandoned named neurons

Does someone have to go out of their way to take down a named neuron if its now inactive or should there be some sort of renewal process.
Just a thought, curious to other peoples thoughts


Great question. IMO this problem has already been solved with resetting follower and named Neuron relationships. If people want to continue to get voting reward then they will not follow inactive named neurons. I don’t think inactive neurons should be removed. Maybe flagged for not voting so people know not to follow them. The records should continue to live on the blockchain.

Dfinity needs to implement the followee reset.

I didn’t think the neuron would go away even if removed from the list so all the records should still be there right?

1 Like

Inactive named neurons shouldn’t be removed entirely but perhaps there should be a separate list where they cannot be followed. Otherwise the active list will grow to an unmanageable size. That will probably still happen as adoption becomes more widespread. There’s a lot of room for improvement in the realm of named neurons, but I don’t want to hijack this thread.


Fwiw I don’t think you’re hijacking anything. Happy to let this thread be a place for taking about these topics.

1 Like

What happens with the neurons following TFC after it gets removed as a Named Neuron? Is the code for removing Named Neurons already implemented in the NNS or do we need a second proposal for that?

I believe the code is already there but I could be wrong. Maybe @diegop or @lara can confirm.

As far as what happens, I believe any existing followers will continue to follow the neuron until they change their settings. If the proposal is adopted I will set the neuron to automatically follow ICDevs on all proposals for those who don’t see the announcement.

It might be a fun experiment to set it to the BTB DAO and actually try to get some people using axon to vote and grow the voting pool. That probably isn’t aligned with exactly what your original focus of the neuron was, but if you don’t wanna waste the opportunity, it might be interesting.

We can also add the eventually reject contract as a hot key to whatever you did have set up previously. At least, then no one will be losing maturity.

I’m kind of curious what happens if you submit a Register Named Neuron proposal and it is Rejected by the NNS. I’m not sure if that results in removal of the neuron from the registered named neuron list or if it results in no change to the list.

Rejected proposals will not activate any code contained in it, so… I’m almost sure that it will not make any changes on the neurons list. “Register Known Neuron” only adds data to the registry.
It seems to me that removing anything from the registry on the blockchain is against its basic principles. Should stay the same, but it’s worth adding new tools to help you navigate around it.

Maybe the “Hide non-voting neurons in the last 6 months” tick-box option in NNS Dapp will solve the future problem of known but inactive neurons?
In the future, it may even be useful to search using keywords.

1 Like

Honestly I just assumed there was a method for removing a named neuron. I guess that may be a bad assumption; I was planning to dig into it tomorrow.

If there really isn’t an option to do this I think it’s a bit of a pain. AFAIK the neuron will still exist as will it’s voting record. I’m not trying to hide anything by doing this. I just don’t want it to be promoted as an active option anymore. As far as immutability is concerned, i think removing this neuron ID from a list on the NNS dashboard is about as benign as it gets.

I just have concerns about passing around VP like that. Although if there’s no option to remove it from the list then I may reconsider.

There may be a method for removal by now. It was discussed and scoped thoroughly during discussion that lead to renaming “cycle_dao” to “Arthur’s neuron”. You’ve probably already found this thread, but @Dylan and @lara added some great feedback in that thread regarding current capability as well as next steps for feature development for neuron removal.

Perhaps you should consider renaming the neuron to something like “The Fool’s Court (deprecated)” or “Deprecated Named Neuron - The Fool’s Court”. That should discourage new people from following and eventually encourage current followers to change their Followee. It will also be in the public record that you want it removed from the visible list in the NNS dApp. Anyone could then make that happen when the NNS feature becomes available.


It would be useful if the neuron controller could flag the categories in which it votes manually and whether it is currently actively voting. Also, the ability to change the description (it should be able to be updated to keep it up-to-date) by calling the method as controller, not by NNS voting.
This would prevent an excessive number of proposals, which we have to read and verify their correctness.

Edit: The activity flag could toggle automatically in case of manual activity or or lack thereof.


Who’s on the neuron now? We could set it up as an axon as is and let it evolve itself.

Hi @LightningLad91
I agree with @wpb 's assessment and his suggestion seems like a pragmatic way forward.
In addition I will check with the NNS eng team if there is any angle which I might have missed.


@bjoernek @wpb @skilesare first i want to thank you for your feedback and suggestions. I’ve decided to take the approach of requesting a rename to “Inactive (Request Removal) - The Fools’ Court”.

Unfortunately when I attempted to submit the proposal this evening I received an error stating that my caller was not authorized to make proposals. I found this strange considering I imported the identity from the .pem file I had stored alongside all of the data from the original named neuron proposal.

I am using a new laptop and I know my old one is configured correctly so I will make a second attempt tomorrow evening.


Thanks for the update. If you want help then let me know. The neuron being registered is not required to submit this proposal, so I’d be happy to submit it for you if needed.

Thank you for the feedback @LightningLad91.

It seems that the neuron of “The fool’s court” has a stake of 1 ICP as per the dashboard.
For submitting a proposal you require a stake of 10 ICP. Most likely this is the source of the error.

So you could either top up this neuron, or as mentioned by @wpb, use a different neuron for submitting the re-naming proposal.