Subject: Clarification on Proposal 135752 & Request for Guidance
Dear CODEGOV & IC Community,
In the spirit of transparency, I have provided explanations regarding Proposal 135752 in the recommended discussion areas on the DFINITY Forum, detailing my request to update node rewards for the 14 nodes in HU1, which I have operated since before Genesis.
Forum Links for Reference:
New Node Provider Proposals Discussion
Proposal Update: Interim Gen 1 Node Provider Remuneration
While I acknowledge a syntax error in my initial submission, I was disappointed that my forum posts did not seem to factor into the review process, nor did they receive direct engagement.
Seeking Clarity on the Recommendation to Reject
As a first-time proposal submitter, I would appreciate guidance on the following:
Was the rejection recommendation based solely on syntax, or were there additional concerns?
Did CODEGOV review my forum posts, or were they overlooked in the decision-making process?
Was there any missing information in my forum posts that could have addressed concerns and gained support?
Humbly Asking for Your Support
I hope this explanation assuages any concerns regarding Proposal 135752, and I humbly ask for your vote in favor of adoption.
Next Steps
If the proposal fails, I will resubmit it with corrected syntax, ensuring the appropriate forum links are included directly in the proposal text. However, I would greatly appreciate any specific guidance from CODEGOV or others on improving transparency and compliance for future proposals.
Having supported the Internet Computer since before its inception, I am committed to ensuring my proposals adhere to best practices and contribute positively to the network. Any insights would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best regards,
John Harris, Node Operator: fthz3
43rd Big Idea Films, LLC