This proposal requests that my neuron, Motoko News, be registered as a Known Neuron on the NNS. It represents a transparent, high-stakes voter focused on real adoption, long-term alignment, and ethical governance within the Internet Computer ecosystem.
2. Motivation
The Internet Computer needs more voters who are both deeply invested and committed to decentralization. As an 8-Year Gang member and ICP whale, I’m here to support serious proposals that build the future of Web3 and reward the community for showing up.
3. Neuron Goals
Vote consistently and transparently across all proposal types
Support real builders and value-driven projects
Reject spam, empty promises, and anything that weakens decentralization
4. Contributions to the Ecosystem
Active X (Twitter) presence supporting ICP adoption
Community engagement through giveaways, education, and ecosystem support
Long-term lockup with a high stake in ICP — proving alignment with the project’s success
5. Pros
High voting power aligned with long-term growth
Transparent and active in public conversations
Represents a real user, not just an institution
6. Cons
Not part of a foundation or major entity (which is also a strength)
7. Key Milestones
Member of the 8-Year Gang with max dissolve delay
Publicly supporting ecosystem projects and proposals
Strong community advocacy via X and direct feedback to devs
Vote to register Motoko News as a Known Neuron. As a high-stake participant who’s locked in for the long haul, I’m here to vote with principle and push for real, lasting growth in the ICP ecosystem.
I’m fully in support of expanding the Known Neuron landscape beyond foundation-linked identities. We definitely need more high-stake, independent voters who care about decentralization and ecosystem health.
That said, this looks more like a Motion proposal rather than an actual Register Known Neuron proposal, so the process might need a proposal of a different type. If you need help with the technical side of registration as Known Neuron, I’d be happy to assist.
Also curious, what kind of proposals do you plan to focus on the most? Governance? SNS & Neurons’ Fund? Other topics? Great to see more voting neurons stepping up
I just realized the wrong proposal was made via Juno and currently they don’t have an option to submit the correct type of proposal. I am not savvy in coding and would love some help submitting this proposal if possible! Could you help me? I plan on voting on every proposal that is made!
Absolutely, I fully support your first proposal as a way to introduce yourself and your intentions to the community. It’s great to see a committed, high ICP stake participant. If this Motion gets adopted (which I hope it does - so you don’t lose your 25 ICP), we can definitely use it as a basis to submit the proper Register Known Neuron proposal. And when it comes to voting on other, more technical proposals, you don’t necessarily need to understand ALL the details. It’s more about following experienced neurons and using that as a basis for voting responsibly on topics that you don’t understand well yet.
Once it’s approved, I can help to get you officially registered!
You know that person who submitted the proposal is Scott Summers, known scammer in ICP community who changes his X profile name more frequently than proposals come in ?
TLDR: This is an AI generated announcement, as @WebTreeSoftwareSolut astutely pointed out. If you copy the original markdown (which humorously is preceded with the word markdown) and feed it into popular detection tools, you get a 100% confidence score.
Long story short, I have no confidence in what an LLM has to say in this sort of context. If the proposer would like to confirm the claims made by the LLM then I would take a closer look and consider adopting a follow up proposal.
For starters:
Could you provide a link?
Could you provide some references for all of the above, demonstrating giveaways, education and ecosystem support.
The proposed known neuron is currently dissolving. Could you confirm what your long term intentions are with this neuron, particularly in the context of making it a known neuron.
Why is it dissolving? The stake is in the process of exiting its long-term commitment.
This isn’t the case for the proposed known neuron and is more likely than not just a hallucination. The proposing neuron is 8 year staked, but there’s no way to verify that the proposed known neuron belongs to the proposer given that it’s currently set to private.
Please could you commit to writing your own announcement that provides clarity. I would suggest raising a new proposal that links to that announcement instead.
I would strongly suggest that the community reject this proposal
You may wish to follow the LORIMER known neuron if you found this analysis helpful.
Note that I am no longer a member of Synapse, and I would strongly advise following others if you believe that known neurons should be held to account for their claims about transparency and decentralisation.
In fact I just took a closer look and notice that the proposer is @krzysztofzelazko. Hey Krzysztof. I know that you mean well with this proposal. Please don’t take any offense to my review. My issue lies with the owner of the proposed known neuron, and their announcement (not you). Nevertheless, I would still recommend rejecting this proposal for all the reasons I outlined.
At the moment it’s difficult to distinguish between hallucinations, intentional lies, and what’s real. I certainly hope the foundation consider this to fall outside of what’s considered adoptable.
Ah, I just noticed you did in fact link to twitter. Not the most professional news outlet you’re running though. Do you think this reflects well on the IC (particularly if ‘Motoko News’ were an official known neuron)? →
Lol, Motoko News is just Scott Summers in disguise — ICP’s premier rug pull artist.
All this talk about “ethical governance” and “long-term alignment”? Pure theater.
Trust isn’t handed out for free, and Scott’s history screams red flags.
If the community lets this slide and hands him Known Neuron status, they’re basically signing off on another disaster.
Hey @Lorimer, I really appreciate the time you took to dig into the proposal and share your thoughts. It’s clear you’re deeply committed to transparency in NNS governance, and that’s something I respect.
I totally get your concerns and I want to say up front that I didn’t take your comments personally. I understand that your feedback is more about the context around the motion and how things were presented than about me specifically. That said, I do agree that some things could’ve been explained more clearly, especially around the neuron’s current dissolve status and the way the announcement was written.
At the same time, I’m not convinced that using AI for text or markdown formatting should disqualify someone outright. AFAIK, the neuron is dissolving, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’ll be dissolved. The dissolve delay could be extended again, and there’s always the possibility that the person behind it has other neurons too. And even if it’s a private neuron, I don’t see a reason to reject it based on that alone - after all, the registration process doesn’t require public voting in advance, and the neuron becomes visible once it’s known.
Just to clarify: I’m not defending the proposer personally. I’m only offering help with the process. I think they could have done a better job preparing their registration, absolutely! But I also don’t think that’s a reason to write them off completely. From what I’ve seen, they’ve been active on X and involved in the community. As for the criticism about being “unprofessional” - honestly, I’d take that with a grain of salt. Sometimes the world takes itself too seriously. In my country, one of our most talked-about presidential candidates built his following through funny videos and no-filter posts on TikTok - and ended up with over 15% of the votes in the presidential election. Another guy, who stirred up controversy by vandalizing public property, still pulled 6%. I’m not saying that kind of behavior is admirable, but it does show how broad the spectrum of public engagement can be in a democracy.
At the end of the day, I just want to see people have a fair chance to participate - even if their approach isn’t perfect. I believe we can aim for transparency, uphold strong standards, and still leave space for different kinds of contributors. Thanks again for holding the “line on quality” - conversations like this keep the evolution of the system moving in the right direction
If the fact that all of the people in this thread, many of whom agree on almost nothing… all agree that this guy is a con artist. Maybe you should think about your position of backing his known neuron. It had nothing to do with being “different.”
Its a proven track record of ripping off retail, and giving the whole community a bad look. We dont need to elevate the status of people with these track records. No thanks.
To the 10 people that dislike me in ICP they spread false narratives. Find one person I scammed that lost money to me and they will be reimbursed. Never happened. I made projects that failed yes but anyone that lost I reimbursed. Go to lunarcrush.com and see who the #1 Icp influencer is. It’s me. I have 10,000 Icp staked long term and have the only known Icp tattoo. I own ultra rare motokos too. My proposals will pass and I will keep building as I do and will be here forever way past these men that speak falseness. Do your own research.
