Symbiont{s} | He Who Fights With Monsters

Greetings!

      We usually like to interact with the community with hands full of gifts because the language of actions and tangibility are always louder and more powerful than empty promises and lengthy sophistic discussions. This is why we have always made sure to stay out of politics as much as possible, and instead focus on developing and providing flawless services and support. This approach also stems from our belief and understanding of how DPOS chains work, in a sense where debates and the process of reaching decisions toward actual actions do not necessarily need to be based on logic or common understanding, but rather on stacks, which at the end define the truth. One could hope that there would not be any conflict on the chain. Unfortunately, this is one of those easier-said-than-done things, as people will always converge in different directions and human nature tends to play a role in defining or encouraging territorial behavior even in cyberspace.

      It is naturally sound for anyone who is aware of the situation regarding the Blurt DAO to be upset, frustrated, and powerless. For a reason that is still not completely clear, the user @ctime has decided to vote for the Return Proposal that we have created without any consideration of the proposals that were receiving funding. We would have loved to at least be reached and discuss the nature of our work before such a sudden decision. While we understand that @ctime is within his right as a stakeholder, having funding cut off in the middle of working on something is problematic, discouraging, and does not help with planning as we have no clear indicator that we could base our work on since we never know if funding is going to stop or not. We really would have loved to discuss our projects with @ctime to understand the nature of his decision as our Discord server is always open to anyone for an in-depth discussion about anything. We usually enjoy speaking with individuals who have critical thinking and we always tend to conclude to good conclusions after all our discussions even if we do not always agree on the same things.

^{“He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster . . . when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes into you” ~Friedrich Nietzsche}

      We highly encourage the community not to compromise on the core values that we all love and consistently enjoy by being active on a blockchain rather than other centralized entities. It can be something attractive to take drastic measures to solve a problem, but in doing so, more hell doors could be opened. Gaining confidence in a design takes time, as does having a community that is well-versed in that design. It is natural to assume that the collective mind is really important here, considering that any individual with a certain amount of power is going to infuse his own idiosyncrasies into whatever projects or goals he undertakes. Hence, the community needs to make sure to stand against tiny catalysts that aim to push the narrative or the general sentiment toward actions with unknown potential consequences or actions that fall under the "end justifies the means" mindset.

^{“At the moment when I truly understand my enemy, understand him well enough to defeat him, then in that very moment I also love him. I think it’s impossible to really understand somebody, what they want, what they believe, and not love them the way they love themselves. And then, in that very moment when I love them... I destroy them.” ~ Orson Scott Card}

      But the situation has a beauty that just lies beneath the problem itself; a respect that is enforced by the blockchain. The code constitutes a basis on which enemies can mutually respect each other as they play by the same rules. Eventually, understanding the intentional simplicity of the problem is the thing that we believe is going to help us as a community solve the issue. One of the great things about blockchain is its deterministic aspect, and to win in a deterministic game, you only need to be on the side that sustains the game itself, which is in this case "the community" aka the source of value of any blockchain.

      To move to something else, below we would like to address a few things that are of interest to the community.

Removing the Return Proposal by Symbionts

 
      This idea was suggested to us by several members of the community. Unfortunately, making such a decision for us is not as easy as it seems. We established a formal contract with the community before the DAO was in the hands of the community when we created the Return Proposal and asked the community to vote on it. The proposal was to act as a lever for all stakeholders to influence governance. To achieve this, mutual trust was needed, which we made sure to provide. Consequently, we had to decline such a request even though we are the first affected. It is a matter of integrity and belief in certain aspects that we could fundamentally not infringe on to receive funding again. In addition to this, we may add the following points that could be taken into consideration:

• First, removing the proposal will not solve the core issue once and for all since the same issue could be replicated either by casting votes again on other proposals or by creating a new proposal that no one can remove apart from anyone who created it to lock the DAO.
• Second, if there is insufficient power to secure a return proposal and allow other proposals to be funded again, low-mid proposals could be created to farm rewards from the DAO.
• Third, while we disagree with @ctime decision to lock the DAO, blockchain dictates that he has the right to use his stack to influence governance as he sees fit. Manipulation of the DAO in any other way other than the one originally agreed upon would expose us to endless loops of other issues.
• Forth. We have concluded that there is enough active Blurt power in the hands of the community to actually change the DAO situation, and although some key accounts can be used to solve the issue as suggested by @megadrive, we actually agree with him on the idea that the community should come together and positively influence the DAO again instead. A simple solution that would only strengthen our image as a community and solve the issue without breaking any blockchain fundamentals.

Additional clarifications and answers

 
      We have noticed that some users were asking questions and having concerns after a message that we published internally for our curators was leaked without our direct permission to the public which, unfortunately, broke our intent of informing the community at our own pace in due time considering that nothing was set in stone yet. So, without further ado:

• We are not going to dump BLURT, in fact, we almost never powered down our main account @symbionts and managed to use other means to fund development. Instead, we have always avoided causing any selling pressure on BLURT by considering it as a security and long-term investment. A reduction in funding means a reduction in potential security which means a reduction in potential FIAT and other means of funding.
• We are against having a relationship with the Blurt community that is based on fear or ultimatums. The community should not feel pressure to support our Upkeep Proposal, it should only do it if it really trusts us and believes in what we do. No projects or working groups should be ever in a position that would allow them to take the community hostage or pressure it for some kind of support. Luckily, the Blurt core team has managed to cover all vital infrastructure that is needed for the Blurt ecosystem to function flawlessly. In our situation, and considering that we are an autonomous working group that overexpanded compared to actual funding, we will likely gradually regress our activity starting with our curation project since it is the project with the lowest footprint on the community and make sure that the community's favorite, the explorer, stays up as long as we are active on Blurt. Developing on Blurt can be really challenging and most developers who are working on Blurt are likely doing it for the love of the blockchain this is why we wholeheartedly applaud them for their perseverance.

Our sincere apologies to the community for any concerns we may have caused.

Conclusion

 
      How unfortunate!

      We hereby invite @ctime to rethink his decision of locking the DAO. If he is having concerns about the proposals that were funded, we believe that people who are involved in the funded proposal are open to constructive communication. In our case, we can be reached directly via Discord. We would also to invite the community to be more involved in the DAO and understand its implication for the longevity of the chain.

      At the end of the day, we are but mere servants of the community, without it, all our projects lose meaning and purpose. We really hope that the current issues which we consider political will not be entrenched emotionally within people's minds and serve as a lump of fresh coal for a vendettist feeling of satisfaction.

The Symbionts Team,