On another note,
I feel like there are presumptions being made about ECC and why we take certain positions by some members of this forum. I think Sonya is right that “trust is insufficient.” I won’t ask you to trust me, only to hear me, as both a fellow community member and someone that represents ECC.
For Zcash to be successful, we (ECC) must cede power, not to the Zcash Foundation, but to the Zcash community. We shouldn’t simply shift power from one entity to another. I think we all agree on that in principle. It’s why we fought so hard to get language in the trademark agreement that limits the power of both ECC and the Zcash Foundation, mandating that each commit to representing the community’s will.
I understand this process is uncomfortable for anyone that would like ECC to take a strong and definite position on all things. But to cede power runs counter to human nature, and as such, I think people are inherently distrustful of those that attempt to do it. I don’t know, but would guess, that it’s why Satoshi simply disappeared. It is hard to cede power. And it’s hard to take arrows and risk being publicly maligned for doing it.
I believe the polling of Zcash Foundation’s governance panel is legitimate and will result in strong signals. I also believe that’s imperfect and not broadly representative, but that it’s the best means we have today for assessing sentiment. And I steadfastly believe that the ultimate signal will be given by the community through the continued adoption and support of Zcash.
We at ECC are Zcash community maximalists. That means that we believe that all voices in the Zcash community should be heard, for as much as they want to speak, and so we’ll tend to err on that side. We believe this and act in accordance with this, even though it’s hard and uncomfortable, for the long term success of Zcash.
I won’t ask for your trust. But I will ask for thoughtfulness. Thanks for hearing me.
Josh