In protest of this advised change to tokenomics, investors are voting NO on every single proposal ICP put forward indefinitely unless given the option to be grandfathered in.
This was not the agreement we made to stake our neurons for 8 years.
IMPORTANT/UPDATE: Forum discussions on May 6th updated Proposal 1 below. Some people are not reading through the replies thread! The proposal was modified so that 8 Year neurons would NOT be forcibly reduced into 5 Year neurons (and in fact, would have some adjustability too). In the modified proposal, it would only become impossible to set dissolve delays >5Y in the FUTURE, and delays on existing neurons would only be brought down if their owners wished (at their choice).
See the thread, the proposal was modified a while back already based on user push back.
Also for clarity, nobody, including Dfinity can change these sort of things without it being a proposal in the NNS and passing by majority vote.
4 Likes
Right so to keep the voting fair, dfinity aren’t voting, but the ICP is not nearly decentralized enough for the voting to the fair.
So obviously the accounts with enormous voting rewards should be excluded also from the vote as they can swing a vote.
What is the cut off limit (voting power) for who is allowed to participate in this vote?
I’m not sure I follow. If Dfinity abstains what is unfair about it?
So the only people who can vote are those who obtained ICP after the public offering is what I’m getting at.
What do you mean? Everyone who stakes can vote, and Dfinity not voting means that neurons set to auto-follow them won’t have an impact.
Not sure what’s not fair about it.
1 Like
Yes, but are those who obtained ICP (in large amounts) prior to the public offering being allowed to vote also?
This is supposed to be decentralized voting.
If we truly want a fair, public voting without manipulation by whales, it would make sense that only people who obtained ICP after the public offering can vote.
I don’t know how this doesn’t make sense.
@Ajki, @dominicwilliams
Are dfinity staff who did not pay for their ICP (had it included in their employment contracts etc) allowed to vote on this new proposal?
I don’t have anything to do with DFINITY, so I can’t speak on their behalf, but from my perspective, I don’t see a problem with anyone voting. The sole exception is DFINITY (for tockenomics change) , and that’s only because the genesis neurons were set to follow them automatically. If the followee reset were performed, I wouldn’t see a problem if DFINITY voted.
The auto-followee was needed at genesis; otherwise, there was a serious risk of no proposal passing due to the lack of voters. But that’s not the case anymore, and I believe that once the followee reset happens, most will opt to follow DFINITY again.
As for the team that was rewarded with ICP, they should not have any limitations, since it’s already been three years post-genesis, and those who wanted to sell have already done so. It’s not as if the team received ICP for free, just as Dfinity did not receive their labor for free.
The DFINITY employees who stake are on exactly the same footing as the rest of the stakers.
Stop attacking the investors just because they ask questions which are not answered by DFINITY
If you’re not a dfinity employee then don't speak for them. I can only assume you’re not qualified to do so.
We don’t want to hear you say the same things again and again. If someone asks you a question you can answer it. If they ask DFINITY that question, its their job to answer it because they own this forums.
1 Like
You’ve lost me because some of your comments are unreasonable and show some immaturity in your tone (and even troll-like behavior). I’m willing to protest anything and anyone just as long as there is a solid good reason for it, and there’s a good and effective tone to go with it.
In your protest here, you say “investors are voting NO”. You shouldn’t try to speak for everyone.
On another discussion, you said ICP or Dfinity is being “sneaky”. THat was uncalled for. First, give suggestions on ways that Dfinity can make the proposal more visible for everyone to see before jumping to such conclusions. In fact, Dfinity has taken steps to make the proposal more visible. On my NNS account, when I click on neuron staking, I found this message at the very top of the page:
There were changes made to proposal topics. Review your neuron following to confirm it is set up according to your preferences. Learn more
That makes the proposal very visible to ALL stake holders. The link in that message also points to the discussion on the Proposal on tokenomics.
I think this post is specifically advocating for no tokenomics change.
Dominic should add and consider all the options, right?
1 Like
Its not IMO. I reviewed it and manually brought it back.