Do you think individuals have the right to attempt to order the founder’s fund to be sent to the dao?
What’s your stance on the property rights of this fund?
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
Well in fact they do have the right to attempt to order anything that they would like to. That's free speech maximalism for you. Does not mean that it will happen but they can advocate for that if they would like to.
like every account on blurt except the accounts that have never been used, the property rights of the so-called founders fund or the so-called foundation or whatever the heck that thing is, must remain intact.
I suppose that the final point here is that we don't actually have a governance mechanism that can make those changes in a legitimate way. The real way to make those changes is to create a fork of blurt, or to do what blurt did to start, which is a snapshot and then an airdrop.
Otherwise, the only way to make those changes is to create a software upgrade that all of the witnesses run at a certain block height. I think we do not need 100% consensus. it might be 2/3 if I'm not mistaken.
I find your attitude most refreshing.
What changes are those?
Can you explain to me as a non-tech what is meant by snapshot and airdrop?
Megadrive was concerned about the chain being forced somehow to empty the foundation fund.
I think this concern was totally invalid.
In cosmos, it is possible (example Juno) to use governance to affect individual accounts. That's not possible on blurt.
Thank you.
You mean there was fear that someone could influence the witnesses to write code which would allow them to freeze someones account?
I think it's imaginable and therefor it's probably possible. But that would require a lot of criminal energy. And people hate being criminals from my point of view.
It is totally totally possible to either nuke or freeze accounts and to move funds arbitrarily between accounts. The key protection against this is the witnesses themselves. That's why it's really important that you choose good witnesses because those witnesses protect you against more or less endless and myriad threats.
That was to be expected, that the money is the most important thing to you! You must have enough already!
Dissolving Blurt Core and it’s funds means dissolving the team, dissolving the infra and taking Blurt into the dark ages.
Maybe. This is totally one possible outcome.
Thanks for your stewardship of blurt man.
He is allowed to ask anything and well I don't know I think it's a perfectly valid question if those kinds of conversations are occurring.
I just beat him to it this time!
He first apologized for a few lies. For the remaining dozens not!
With those funds gone the foundation can’t operate, protect the chain or retain developers. We have a cohesive team and developers do not want to be at the mercy of ctime’s control of the proposal fund and beg him for pay.
After I debunk your lie that you used to justify my exclusion from the Witness channel, will you stop blocking?
We should probably put him back into the witness channel because I would like for his influence on alert to be proportional to his steak, meaning that his influences likely to be large. That's okay with me.
The flip side of this is that @double-u can run a witness without access to that channel, or make his own channel and that's cool with me too.