I do not read Chinese so it could be some miscommunication, but I literally wrote the OPPOSITE of what you just wrote. I literally wrote that we should NOT nominate this channel as “official”. thats why I suggested Herbert we change the copy (before you wrote this dev forum post).
Isn’t it, in the case that ICP is completely dependent on DFINITY, DFINITY creates ICP official community and promotes it on DFINITY official Twitter
Even said that if you don’t trust DFINITY, you should leave IC
What do you propose? that DFINITY NOT promote the IC?
If you will complain anytime DFINITY creates channels or spaces to discuss ICP, then what do you propose?
DFINITY twitter also promotes multiple other community projects and spaces.
I do not understand the outrage at all.
Don’t change the point of the question
I am honestly confused as to what you are arguing. Is this thread not a non-issue?
This is what happened:
- Someone wrote X
- I did not like X
- You do not like X
- X was changed
This is what a healthy feedback loop is.
It seems we are stuck in:
- You want to discuss X
- I say “I also didn’t like X and X was changed, so whats the point?”
- GOTO 5
Also X is not completely changed
Now THAT is useful feedback. I was under the impression it was. Can you point out where it was not? That would help a bunch.
it’s an internal issue at DFINITY, I’m curious if everyone at DFINITY thinks they should leave IC if they don’t trust DFINITY and think that’s how public blockchains are supposed to be
Apologies for my tone, @diegop , appreciate the response
your reply means a bunch @tsetse.
Honestly, you were right in that I did mess up by not replying earlier. I should have responded or delegated better. Not doing a good job scaling
I am not sure I follow.
To be clear… in my summary X == “putting word official on discord channel.”
Are you saying X is not completely fixed? That would be ñ useful feedback
in sum: you are completely unable to directly answer any question directly posed in any of the three threads you’ve posted about this in and can only evasively handwave about “honor” and “beauty”
in fact you have backpedaled so hard just to post that that you have reduced it to something that requires no change: if dfinity is to act as normal, but with NNS sign off on the final product, that already happens and the most recent one was 999f7cc
@ysyms This may not be realistic, most stakers do not have the expertise to select the right person, and DFINITY as a legitimate company is not under the direct management of NNS, even if NNS passes the proposal.
I feel that the right person or in this case organization is why we are mostly here as we believe in this project. Who is to say that most stakers or any stakers have the expertise. I personally have invested into this project and feel they, Dfinity, do have the expertise to make decisions on my behalf and I expect many will disagree but that is what I believe is democracy, as everyone has a say so those of us with less expertise understand the concerns to find a solution.
While it is useful to point out the issues as you see it, you are applying Reverse Representation by telling us that we are not capable and therefore not reasonably able when voting.
Reverse Representation means that you are in fact behaviour just like that of whom you accuse.
@kusiyo If DFINITY is not under the control of NNS, then NNS means nothing but a disguise.
Good point, as pointed out by @ysyms most of us may not capable so Dfinity should have control.
@civolian: Web3 blockchain developers are valiantly seeking the holy grail of true decentralization.
They sincerely want token holders to be meaningfully involved, but it seems nothing will motivate them to vote at the levels needed for true decentralization. The futility is disheartening, and it’s tempting to conclude that token holders will never make the effort to get educated and vote.
They’re only interested in windfalls, which means we’ll just have to accept the fact that decentralization is fundamentally limited and can only be maximized within those limits by clever incentivization mechanisms.
This is also my experience which was stated by @civolian but I point to the last line which I feel is true and disturbing, by clever incentivization mechanisms.
Dfinity has in my opinion been clear about their intention and have stated that this will also take time, discussion and voting to achieve. The pace of this change will not be achieved by accusations but with discussion but too often I see others create clever schemes to encourage those who don’t have the expertise to see Difinty as the enemy.
I feel we have the right to express our ideas, concerns and then have discussion with the community to make change.
Could you imagine a country without a single figurehead or Government, it would not be possible and in my opinion, we would then see many argue that they are and should lead, putting down their strongest opponent as the bad guy.
As pointed out here
@xpung HR, etc can’t possibly be conducted by leaderless democratic vote, and that nobody in their right mind would work at a company where their employment status and pay depends on an annual popularity contest.
@diegop Is IC a private chain of DFINITY?
It is in my opinion both Private and Public. As I might not have the expertise and get it wrong but this is my honest opinion.
The IC is built on a system that is different to the rest of the internet so that any existing technology built on Web2 and 3 cannot run on the IC and in my opinion a private system but public in the way you can built and replicate the current old internet onto the IC without Dfinity or anyone else’s permission.
I see this as a very good reason for doing this. In my opinion the old Internet is broken and needs to be replaced and I feel the IC is where I want to be.
@ysyms DFINITY. Ha ha
this values are going to reshape the Internet, is it to return to feudal society?
Yes, history will always repeat itself and even the internet community will tell you that most projects have a 30 year lifespan, so one day the IC may be replaced.
We are already seeing a feudal society within the IC community with your own clever incentivization mechanisms and why I agree with you.
@tsetse They have no decentralization roadmap, no transparency roadmap, no roadmap to transition away from Dfinity’s hegemonic control over the protocol.
I would think that Dfinity has many unanswered questions about what they are building and maybe they are flying by the seat of their pants and I am sure that many here personally may feel they do know the answer, that they should pose their concerns as questions for discussion and not declare themselves as having the right answer.
Dfinity as I understand it has some of the best qualified people in their team to build the IC and move forward with many of these unanswered questions, I think we will have to wait for these answers from those better qualified than me. There is no guarantee that the IC will succeed at all.
Please be a healthier person @ysyms as anger does not help you and forgive us who are less experienced and I am sure you can point out problems as you see it for our gain as a better community and your relentless attack of @diegop is not really fair or acceptable.
I think it’s kind of funny that we’re having this heated discussion on forum.dfinity.org, a centrally hosted web2 forum that the Dfinity foundation provides.
The IC is more than just Dfinity, and I agree with removing the “Official” branding from the new Discord. I personally have been very involved with supporting the community-run developer Discord, which ironically still is called “Dfinity Dev Official”, even though it is not run by Dfinity at all.
I think there are two fairly uncontroversial takeaways from this thread, which seems to have mostly run its course.
- The IC ought to move to more decentralized organization and discussion over time
- Dfinity still currently plays in important role in fostering discussion today, and should both take concrete steps to reduce that dependency, as well as the perception of that dependency in our comms + messaging
Bro let the foundation do its job to promote the IC. You are creating unnecessary drama with all these
In sum: under the control of NNS, the operation of DFINITY does not change at all; it just needs an official NNS approval in the final.
Why do I repeat it here? Because it can answer all of your questions. You just do not listen carefully.
I will repeat it again and again, until someone can find its logical flaws. I really hope that someone can change my mind.
Of course, DFINITY does not need to be under the control of NNS, because it is possible that IC (including NNS) is indeed under the control of DFINITY.
I love NNS so much. If DFINITY can be under the control of NNS, then it will make ICP fully decentralized and may eventually rule the whole digital world.
I thus believe that IC will be the Metaverse. But I hope that this Metaverse will be under the control of NNS, not under the control of DFINITY.
Before you object, you can change your mind for about five minutes. That’s all I need.
I didn’t intend to get involved in this one, but since you tagged me I’ll provide my $0.02.
I think a project like the internet computer requires that it start off centralized in a lot of ways, but can, and is, evolving toward a decentralized state. This evolution will take many years or even decades, which I think is the right pace. I think there have been many communications from DFINITY that decentralization is a goal and many examples of how they have helped push the community in that direction. I want DFINITY to continue doing what they think is in the long term best interest of the IC. I have no issue with the creation of the new ICP Discord server by DFINITY. By the way, thanks for sharing the link as I hadn’t seen it yet
-implying the foundation does anything to promote the system.
Bro’s, its been nearly 1.5 years, and dfinity’s marketing department is an absolute dumpster fire. I’m fast believing that they actively avoid promoting and marketing this blockchain.
I’d rather all resources are allocated towards coding the stuff we need to propel ourselves, including badlands.