pretty sure you could invite him onto the panel if you wanted to. think i read you have the option to invite 1 person.
That isn’t the point, my vote there carries no more weight than it does here, I believe this and thats proof of it
I’ts not only about voting on dev fund proposals, it’s that the community advisory panel might vote on other things in future as well while the forum members here might not.
I absolutly understand where you are coming from witht he dev fund voting/polling and that’s to a big extend correct what you assume even there is some room that the community advisory panel will result in an echo chamber with invite only. Nobody is inviting someone that might have a total different general view as they have themself.
And from this point of view your vote there carriers indeed some ore weight as you can invite someone who will vote the same. This makes 2 votes. It’s a bit abstract but exactly this will happen.
Than we have the vote count. How many active members are we here on the forum? 10-20? 30? Absolute minority compared to the Community Advisory of 72 + 72 more in theory.
And it’s a principal question that a community advisory panel should not be invite-only but by default include people from all streams, miners, mining pools, VC’s, investors, holders, traders, hardware producers, whomever that has an interterst in Zcash. With invite only another chance is missed to unite as many as possible streams of the Zcash community.
Personal opinion: the real community is being isolated more and more.
This invite only scheme is horrible and what kek suggested with actually holding zcash makes absolutely sense and should be a minimun requirement.
I bet more than half of the advisory panel has less then 50 ZEC
Edit: @moderators this post was marked as off topic, if you guys find my comment as off topic then delete it, if its not then please open a discussion on the user/users that marked it as such.
The reasons you explain above are the reasons why the forum poll exists because community members would not see it fairly
The keyword then like it is now is “advisory”
Why would advisory votes on an advisory panel weigh more than advisory votes from a forum comprised of the same people who would have been on that panel?
I have no idea why you use the wording weigh more all the time. I never used this wording and you keep going asking questions with the wording you invented your own.
IF there is no difference in the past, now and future, while there is difference actually, why is the advisory panel exclusive invite only?
Just as an example, if they take the time line for the mentioned to be a forum member for voting, if i remember right it was May or March 2019 and the Placeholder or Blocktown guys don’t get an invite they can’t vote for example?
The question is NOT if a vote weights more or not, but that not everybody with interest in ZEC is granted access to voting. IF not everybody from different Zcash streams is granted to vote than not everybody stream is represented, easy and simple as that.
IF you think the community with voting powers today is represented on the advisory panel and the forum so it be, i don’t think all streams are represented fairly and enough.
I can’t see mining operations represented anywhere, i can’t see mining pools represented, i can’t see hardware producers represented, i can’t even see the VC’s that made proposals reprensented as they have no forum voting power by the time line set.
All i see represented so far are some forum junkies here, 1/3 of the community panel with ECC/ZF/Mods/Admins and 2/3 i even have no idea who they are with some expections.
Total joke your post was marked as off topic. It’s absolutly on-topic in my opinion.
Which category would you dichotomise me into? - just for fun.
I guess as current non-ZEC holders, non-miners, non-anything direct other than the forum here i would say we both fit best into the forum junky category, for now. Iám personally prepared to buy in again as soon as i think we may have hit the bottom and i wouldn’t hesitate to to hold 1000-2000 ZEC IF everything looks promising again, which it does not yet in my opinion.
The Advisory panel vote and the Forum panel vote are only two of multiple ways the foundation is collecting Community sentiment, they have to sift through the noise because like you said the community isn’t clearly defined
The zcash foundation board of directors cannot abdicate legal responsibility of the foundation
Whatever proposal the foundation supports will be decided by the board of directors
You cannot create a voting system that would legally bind the foundation to any decision outside of their own, stop trying to create one
All we can do is Select board members with the Project’s best interest at heart and provide sound arguments to them about why we think what we do
I tried to take a real break this weekend, so apologies for not seeing this thread until now.
We’re unlikely to change anything about how we’re handling the Community Advisory Panel.
Everyone on the forum whose account meets the age threshold will have the same opportunity to weigh in as Community Advisory Panel members. ZF is going to ask the same questions of both.
We might be able to filter out forum accounts that belong to Community Advisory Panel members, so that people like @kek and myself don’t get “double votes,” so to speak. (Vote is not the right word, exactly, but I can’t think of a better one.) Is that something you all would want?
As the account threshold for some proposal makers isn’t meet by them and they aren’t goveranance panel members either it will interesting to see how the placeholder and Blocktown guys for example are going to vote. They must hope to get some invite to the governance panel …
We would indeed very much like an invitation to the governance panel if anyone from the community has an extra invite and thinks our opinion could contribute to the discussion.
You will mostly get some invite or some kind of “wildcard”, at least that is what i hope for you as you are in a very special position as a VC and proposal maker, but what about all the others interesting in giving a vote not able to do so due the forum threshold restrictions and the community avisory panel invite only?
This should be the minimum that had to be done, not to allow double votes.
Not that i awaited something else to be honest, but i had to make the suggetions so that more Zcash interested people are able to vote. Silently i hoped it’s in the interest of the ZF to gain as much as possible votes/polling from people, but with these restrictions i doubt it will happen, but me more limited, but than again, maybe it works out, i just have my doubts that all streams are represented.
what was the threshold again? May, March or April? Can’t remember what month it was exactly.
Any chance to get some other questions involved in the “questionaire” and voting?
You can certainly still specify a certain recruiting process for the Community Advisory Panel in a ZIP! But it would only be in effect after NU4.
Politburo is another name.
In which ZIP the recruiting process was decided to be invite-only? Did i miss that one somehow?
And if you don’t mind Sonya, still the question, is it possible beside the voting to have other questions attached to the voting that are not soley to the proposal but concern other aspects of the dev fund discussion?
That’s what the Zcash Foundation board decided.
I could ask Josh. What do you have in mind?
It’s not only about me, but others could have even better ideas on what to include for polling/voting.
But as you asked me here some points i could imagine to be included to check the communities stance, just adding some in short not to make again a very long post, lol.
Should a 3rd entity be added resulting in a 2 of 3 multisig for allocating/releasing dev funds.
Should the trademark multisig be finished bevor any further dev fund decisions are made.
Should the ECC convert from a for-profit company into a non-profit organization?
These are some very important ones that in my opinion should be included.
Eventually some other questions regarding the current dev fund discussion could be included as well, for example:
What dev fund should the ECC receive in the period 2020-2024 in percent of blockreward?
0%, 1-5%, 6-10%, 11-15%, 16-20%, 20+%
What dev fund should the ZF receive in the period 2020-2024 in percent of blockreward?
0%, 1-5%, 6-10%, 11-15%, 16-20%, 20+%
Should the Community Advisory Panel have more influence into the decisions made by the ZF and/or ECC?
As said, just some that come into my mind to be added to poll even more the community sentiment on given matters as there is some voting/polling anyway, why not use it for more important questions. And as said, other community members might have even better ideas what to include.
Josh says, “in addition to asking about specific proposals, we’ll ask about general themes from all the proposals (including some but not all of the suggestions he made).” Probably slightly reworded