Announcing my resignation from the ZOMG

@artkor’s post was removed, as I predicted, because apparently it is okay to call an entire community sexist without any evidence, but it is not okay to talk about the sexes while quoting scientific research.

I flagged all the posts that claim that the Zcash Community is inherently sexist without offering any evidence. Please remove as it is highly detracting and offensive, and fails to create a harassment-free experience for everyone


Sad to see you step down from ZOMG, @sarahjamielewis

Good luck with the future! Hopefully you’ll still be active in the ecosystem.

As a mostly passive forum participant, sometimes I felt overwhelmed with the negativity of some people here. Can’t imagine how those who have a public position must have felt.

1 Like

I would say people have attributed the misunderstanding to the fact that Sarah was the messenger, yes. Online this was alluded to and I’ve heard it offline too.

1 Like

I’d just like to echo this sentiment here. It’s disappointing that this was seen as the best recourse, followed by implications of lax security and insinuations of sexism that are then amplified beyond the community without substantiation.


This issue has only just come to my attention and I obviously need to get caught up on context, but regardless:

I must disagree with the notion that we should assume unfavourable attitudes or reception of Sarah, given technical expertise, had to have been driven by sexism. That is a lazy leap. We all know people whose personalities clash with others. Sexism is not needed to explain this. Sexism is a serious accusation, and should not be made by the mere not being able to think of an explanation. The consequences of such a reaction can include creating a culture of fear, or a sense that we are obliged to agree extra with women despite our actual state of agreement. That is dangerous.

Second, as a voting member, I would strongly oppose any initiative to select ZOMG members based on experience with being the object of sexism. The reason is that I don’t know how to decouple that from selecting people who have made an identity of being the victim of sexism. This kind of person sees everything through the lens of his or her own trauma and will bring toxic bias.

Likewise, I am not in favour of voting in two more women because they are women. I value diverse representation, but only if that diversity is relevant to specific goals. For example, class diversity and citizenship diversity may be relevant to security needs.

Moreover, the security and cryptography community is mostly men, and to try to equalise representation of women would in fact disproportionately represent them. Why add another reason for women who have earned their place in this community to feel imposter syndrome? Let them know they are valued for what they bring to the table and not because we needed token women.


Wow, I wish I were as level headed, and thoughtful and as skilled a communicator as you! Or even close!

This is precisely why your departure from the ZOMG would be such a trauma to the community.

Please don’t go.


There’s tons of stuff to get done, lets get back to work? Dwelling on what might or might not have happened and exploring how we all feel about it is not very productive.

What’s the plan? DC was next on the list, temporary seat until confirmed (or not) by CAP vote? Something else?


The forum software won’t let me repost a comment here, so I’m linking to it instead: Request for Input: Securing the Zcash Ecosystem - #14 by zebambam


Sorry Im British English. These words in this order make no sense to me in a democratic vote.

Specifically what does “out of step with best practices mean” - Which? can I have a look at a copy?

I disagree with the rest of your post, but this is nothing to do with me. I just want to know what “gender best practices are” and how they intersect with democracy.

1 Like

wrong thread?

Geezz… @dontbeevil your right, here’s a new topic:

You’re right @dontbeevil that post shouldn’t be here! @zancas would you please delete your mispost?

Interesting how you both joined the forum on January 15th, but also have deep insight the history of the “toxic culture” that @zebambam helped to create.

Also interesting how you have a nym that is an imperative about what people should do, and you manage to bring up “ECC leaders” in a thread about the ZOMG…

I wonder which other nyms on this forum can be frequently associated with the phrase “ECC leader”? @Shawn @decentralistdan ? How about nyms less than two months old? Is there a really glaringly obvious pattern here?


may be they are influenced by my handle dont-be-evil? That’s the nature of pseudonyms, you sum up your core belief into your handle. Decide & judge based on the content, not based on their handle. Like I said, it’s not clear if these voices are being heard or making any difference. If they get that feeling of being heard then they probably would stop making the same point in different contexts while being relevant.


What a strange and unfortunate series of events which seem to have unfolded. It does seem to highlight the oversight of succession planning in the election process and the real lose is to the community and projects. I wish Sara the best in here future endeavors and the community a quick resolution to the committee staffing so they can get back to the people business


Aw, thanks. :heart:

That means a lot, and I really like your contributions here too.

Please don’t worry. We’re all very committed to not losing any momentum, and were already operating very nimbly. I don’t think this would have disrupted our grantmaking even if it had dragged out.

The trickiest thing for the ZOMG itself is probably the problem we started with: figuring out the right way to fund Zecwallet and other future grantees. But I think/hope we were already on a path to figure that out before Sarah’s departure, and that while Sarah leaving is a huge loss, we still have a good chance of figuring it out.

Here’s how I think they’d intersect, ideally: a majority of ZCAP would observe (in Zcash ecosystem or in broader life / politics / etc) that diverse groups have advantages over non-diverse groups and vote for a diverse group.

The system of voting we have right now makes it impossible to do this without giving up the ability to express a preference about many candidates, but staggered voting, or “vote for your ideal committee” would make it possible.


I strongly disagree with this stance. Inclusion is the only way do diversity. but as not to derail this thread. we can continue this through pm. (you cant vote for people that dont stand and voting for someone because of arbitrary characteristics is not something I am comfortable with)


sorry to hear you’re leaving. your contributions were appreciated :grimacing:

This kind of talk is the reason why Zcash is the laughing stock in the crypto world. This thread only suppressed the price for the last 2 weeks, especially with the later conversation. You figure it out what i mean and why that is. And yes, i did joined just to write this because this entire thing is infuriating. Welcome to the real world people!


What leader at ECC are you referring to?