Notice how the Steward of Gov (Primate) likes Kevin Mehrabi’s posts, but doesn’t defend the accusation made against him for being corrupt.
They make this too easy. And we haven’t even started, thats the funny thing.
1 Like
I have nothing to defend against. My track record speaks for itself. If you refuse to engage on a governance level and do some actual community organization and politics, that’s on you.
Please cease your accusations and threats and engage this thread in the spirit it was intended.
I will not get into a back and forth with you because it will only waste time and resources that can be better spent making changes, which are currently in progress.
No one is taking the project over. If the project fails, it will stop serving the Tezos ecosystem. You might feel good about that but the thousands of users that rely on it on a daily basis won’t.
Selective reading 100%
1 Like
You have everything to defend against, you’re the corrupt Steward of Governance. It’s been highlighted to you multiple times that the DAO is flawed and is heavily favoured towards the team and friends, compared to us the users that fund this platform.
I have engaged in this thread as it was intended, I answered Kevin’s questions and educated him on what a suggeston is, supplied the roadmap, even beat him in a game of chess.
You don’t want to go back and forth because you know you’re in the wrong, supporting a team which has no ties to Tezos any longer.
Respond to dumbass’s breakdown of operational costs/sustainability and answer my question Kevin dodged; “You tell me the last signifcant update to the app you’ve noticed? Or the last time you’ve seen a member of the team speak to the community directly.” or better, when did the team last have a good conversation with any of us?
You seem to be scared of change, a different team would take this project on in a heartbeat. Its probably that $3.2k/month you’ll get supporting this fraud.
There are not enough hours in the day to address yours assumptions, allegations and interpretations.
Let me do my job (once and if it starts at the end of the month) and then judge me on the outcome. I’m taking notes on the legitimate grievances and looking to change them. Until then, please let me know if there are any proposals you’d like to submit to make things more fair according to your views of how things should run.
Last warning on the name calling.
It’s your job, if there isn’t enough hours in the day for you maybe you aren’t a good fit for the role?
We are already speaking out now, as I have stated there is a plethora of issues, the DAO is a big one but so is this teams productivity, then charisma and so on…
Putting proposals through won’t change a thing when they dominate the voting with their friends in the ecosystem… How many times do I need to say this?
A warning for calling you corrupt?
Respond to dumbass’s breakdown of operational costs/sustainability. Where is it headed?
I’m currently the SoG, responsible for the proposal logistics based on the constitution. If you’re unwilling to engage with that at all, there is nothing I can tell you or do for you right now, in my current capacity. There are thousands of people who hold TED that have not delegated; you’ll be better served functionally by spending your energy in forming a coalition to represent your interests.
After I start my new position of CM (assuming I’m elected), I will take the time to address all concerns brought forth and I won’t be speaking alone, at that time. I have many productive things planned for this community and I hope to get you on board by addressing some of your concerns over time, by concrete actions, not by going back and forth and flapping our gums in the wind.
The name calling is a non-starter, you will be muted and after that banned, if you can’t follow the guidelines I just posted, so there is no confusion.
If you think this project has gone past the point of redemption and there is nothing to be done other than to restart, that’s a view you’re entitled to but, understand there is nothing more that can be said because of the presumption of guilt that’s already been decided by you.
I respect all of that. I’m merely stating how it looks from a community perspective. You know the DAO is flawed but to us it seems as if you are ignoring it for the sake of the money, hence the corruption allegations.
Please can either you or the team respond to dumbass’s breakdown? i’m interested in the trajectory of the project.
I have nothing more to ask other than that for now.
Honestly, couldn’t care if they did reply or not. I just got called a liar by Kevin so I had to provide a solid breakdown to what I was saying.
I just want to see change, electing a new cm is a good start in the right direction.
The first step needed here before making any legit progress on the roadmap is making governance make sense…
We are looking at multi-week proposal times to execute on anything, as well as just a few voters making up the voting percentage. Even a small UI change will take more 1-2 months to execute on.
It doesn’t make sense to ask the remaining few community members to come up with answers/solutions to their concerns when major ecosystem contributors that make up the voting system are all in a group chat with their minds made up on any issue. Core Team, Steward of Governance, and CM should be the ones coming with these answers/solutions to the governance weight concerns. We haven’t even heard from the core team since the airdrop practically, just funding proposals.
How are we going to work to spread the voting rights across users to make voting less centralized? How does Tezos Domains mantain their treasury and stay afloat with current salaries?
To me its a major red flag having someone come in to promote building a decentralized governance model, gains mass delegation, releases an inefficient model, and then steps down as soon as they get voted into a higher paid role.
Reference for already looking for a new SOG…
(https://x.com/BakingBenjamins/status/1757421912030937537?s=20)
Also keep in mind, in December the same person was telling me my $2k/mo offer is too much money and just earned a 50% pay increase for the CM role when revenue is doing nothing but decline.
1 Like
I don’t want to take the spotlight away from Ethan’s post as there is a lot of truth in it but;
“We are looking at multi-week proposal times to execute on anything, as well as just a few voters making up the voting percentage. Even a small UI change will take more 1-2 months to execute on.” - This is all to the Core teams benefit, they love these delays, ~3 updates a year and an easy $140k secured (just for maintanence alone), think about it.
The reason why Primate is getting shade thrown at him is because he sees the issues (with governance especially) and is siding with the team and letting them get away with it.
I’ve said it at the beginning of this thread where the true issue lies.
“Even the most recent keep the lights on proposal was ridiculously high IMO.” - Well said brother, this guy is a dev if i’m not mistaken? that and going back to Ethan’s post with the screenshot of Primate saying he’s never seen this kinda pay just sums it up really.
This is an addon to Ethan’s post, respond to his post not mine & don’t forget about dumbass’s recent breakdown of costs/sustainability, still waiting on the reply to this.
Welcome back Ethan! I’m happy you’re active now and addressing the issues you think are relevant to the success of the TED project. It would have been nice to see you do that before as part of your team position but later is better than never. Now you have a great position to do so, when you’re not being constantly attacked.
I’m looking for a replacement of SoG because I don’t want to be the CM and the SoG at the same time. You can’t complain about centralization from one side of your mouth and scorn efforts to decentralize from the other side.
On the subject of my CM salary, that’s going to cover the cost of moderators and a social media manager. I wanted to hit the ground running and recruit new people into the team without having to wait a month at a time for each one.
As for salary in general, may I remind you that you asked for 3K for the same position, one where you already did the bot dev work. I guess the underlying assumption is that you’re worth more and your time is more valuable than mine. I can live with that and time will tell.
I do have some solutions in mind and tough conversations are being had. Like you said many times yourself, it’s easier to throw shade as an OG than propose solutions or do things to resolve the issues. It’s really interesting how time changes all things.
Interesting, however…
Out of all people, you shouldn’t really be having an input on costs & wages when you did literally nothing worthy of your pay check for months.
If you can honestly sit there and say you’re worth the money based off your past time at tezos domains then I’ll be damned.
Not saying your ability isn’t worthy, you just didn’t show it much during your time as CM.
I think you’re bashing primate abit too much, at the end of the day, he is the only closest thing to the team and is the only one actually communicating with the community.
There’s only so much the guy can do lol, you’re expecting him to make drastic changes to something he has limited control over.
He was unpaid to be a SoG for some time, done it out of mentality & was the only one with significant power to vote for my proposal as he deemed my airdrop to be valid, nobody else did, if it wasn’t for someone who gave a hoot about fairness then I would’ve just got nada.
Does this mean token-gating for webpages that use tezos.domains?
That would be awesome! Allowing .tez domain holders to offer NFT collections for different levels of access to their content would be a gamechanger…real value creation.
Can you go into more detail about this idea?
There are some great token gating usecases for NFTs. NFTs are prety easy to mint these days on Tezos. Technically I imagine it like being able to mint some NFTs by the domain holder and by including some sort of code in the htaccess file of a website, the visitors would have different levels of access to the content of the website based on wether or not they have a certain NFT.
