I do have a last remark.
… make sure you have your facts straight.
I suggest to get your act together and start thinking. As a CM and delegate who is using a name which is not tied to the core feature of Tezos Domains: change your public name! You can’t expect regular users to read everything that is being posted.
Look at snorlax, I instantly know this is snorlax.tez, even showing pride in carrying that name. You should have checked primate.tez before using “Primate” as a name when you started as a community manager and delegate.
Why didn’t you offer to buy primate.tez. I can’t imagine somebody would not give it away for free considering your position. However, given the substantial amount of Tez you received from community proceeds, acquiring it should pose no financial challenge.
The choice for Primate and not controlling primate.tez hints at that these TED names are evidently not that important. Why would anybody pour their hard-earned money into Tezos Domains when even the CM doesn’t bother with picking and using the right names.
As for professionalism, your response to our previous discussion: it was dismissive and evasive. Here’s what you said:
After further contemplation, I feel compelled to change my vote to PROCEED with P-016. … This last-minute change in direction is deeply unsettling and less than useful.
You completely ignored my arguments by sidestepping them, instead responding to a trivial comment about your inconsistency. I made it clear that your flip-flopping was disconcerting, and frankly, it still is. It shows you don’t think through your decisions; an alarming trait for someone entrusted with a critical vote.
The margin for error is almost zero. There’s one bull market to capitalize on, followed by years of bearish stagnation. A misstep now could irreparably damage the project.
Your “thank goodness” remark — where you celebrated the ability to change your vote — was irrelevant to the debate. If it wasn’t about my post, why mention it? Stop derailing discussions with self-congratulatory asides.
Then there’s this gem:
Serving users who are not speculators above serving name speculators and flippers. As a name speculator myself…
This is hypocritical and absurd. Tezos Domains should serve everyone equally, without moral judgment. Speculators are integral to these ecosystems — they understand the market dynamics that drive adoption and growth. NFTs didn’t explode because they’re “rare and valuable”; they did because the market dictated their worth. Who are you to sit in judgment of user intent? Your narrow view betrays a lack of understanding of the ecosystem you’re supposed to support.
Your repeated vote reversals are indefensible. You claimed to have “further contemplated” your initial decision, only to flip-flop yet again. This pattern suggests difficulty in forming an independent, resolute stance. Why do you hold such a significant vote if you can’t maintain a clear, reasoned position?
As for P-016: this proposal blatantly endorses coercion and blackmail, exploiting users through “loss aversion” psychology. Have you even considered the legal ramifications of such a strategy? This reeks of unethical behavior — manipulating cognitive biases to trap users is indefensible. Do you want to risk associating this project with behavior reminiscent of Martin Shkreli’s disgrace? If you’re too blind to see the risks here: get the fuck out! This is grossly irresponsible and potentially illegal.
