Fighting a wildfire

@ml_sudo It’s apparent that this stonewalling is having such an effect for you to hint about it more than once.

Zcash has had a centralization problem from the very beginning and it was always ignored and labeled as “fud” by insiders. Well maybe those concerns weren’t unfounded.

I’m more than happy to stick up for you over the internet and IRL and I’m sorry that you feel you can’t name them, but I think it’s necessary to keep the community in good health.

P.S. if this person at the ZF sees this, you might as well respond now, otherwise eventually the truth will come out and you are just going to look worse.

1 Like

Nobody really seemed to have an issue with the haste that the MGRC was created. I remember it coming late, nobody suggested deffering and I don’t see any more reason to now.

1 Like

@ml_sudo, the situation is clear, but tbh I don’t think it’s a great example of the general pattern you’re alluding to. Timely election is mandated by ZIP 1014, which ZF and its Executive Director must adhere to. I don’t think it would be great for ZF to set a precedent of deviating from ZIP 1014 at its discretion.

Perhaps one way to reframe this is by proposing a concrete amendment to ZIP 1014 that would achieve what you want, and advocating for urgent vote on this amendment.


Yeah, I agree. We wouldn’t want the Zcash Foundation and its Executive Director to deviate from ZIP 1014 at its discretion. What sort of precedent would that set? :upside_down_face:

Zcash Foundation - Breach of Its Obligations Under ZIP 1014

I do agree with this point and think it may be a decent path forward.


We should start talking about the ZF, otherwise we will lose even more time and miss opportunities to use a significant amount of the development fund effectively and efficiently.

I want to point out that it can’t get any worse than this:


Imo this is best handled by adding a poll option to delay the election / redo it again later, and let the cap vote on that, rather than by cancelling now the attempt to get the cap input


This is an important moment, and CAP needs to reflect the community, not the same CAP that voted for this. Expand CAP now.


There’s something that I think should be made clear at this point.

A desire to make ZOMG more independent was expressed by some ZOMG members shortly after I joined the Foundation. At that time (specifically, in a meeting on April 7th), I made it clear that the Foundation cannot unilaterally change the status or structure of ZOMG in ways that would breach ZIP 1014, and that any proposed changes to ZIP 1014 would need to go through the same governance process that created ZIP 1014 in the first place.


Let me clarify this “desire.” A member of the Zomg parlayed his significant experience working with other crypto ecosystems into the idea of a more independent zomg, at some point in the future. It was a mere suggestion, a process of brainstorming and refinement of the zomg. He was best positioned to provide his input on this topic, having worked with other communities on the same topic - one reason the community voted him in in the first place. You shut him down immediately.

You’re making points that we are already aware of - that no one can willy nilly operate outside of the terms of ZIP 1014. You’re not dealing with a cowboy panel of people who have never worked in business and never negotiated high import transactions. I have managed a $1 billion investment at one point in my career.

Operating outside of the ZIP has never been our intention, but that appears to be how you perceive our intentions. Your language around ZIP 1014 consistently makes it seem like we are a bunch of lawyers sitting opposite each other at the table, playing a zero sum game. Your tone makes it sound like you’re educating a group of trainee lawyers. This perspective is out of place, and incompatible with the people you’re dealing with.

The zomg (and zcash generally) is a live ecosystem. You’re treating it like deadwood to be carved according to your preferences and perspective.

IMHO, the ZF board should be more proactive about the pickle that we have found ourselves in.

Anyway, I give up. I don’t like talking in circles, or throwing my efforts to the wind.


Don’t give up on Zcash @ml_sudo. I understand both sides of arguments per comments on forums.

Best way to reduce internal tensions is by posting proposals on forums with an optional heads up. Community is clearly rallying for independent organization for ZOMG.

Side-note: Lots of popular blockchains / DeFi tokens have announced massive funds from their protocol treasury for attracting devs. KYC-less deliverable based Grants program is necessary to attract top developers.


@aquietinvestor Best way to take this further is by amending ZIP-1014. Would you take the lead?


Don’t give up on Zcash @ml_sudo. :cry:


Yes, I would be happy to take the lead on drafting an amendment to ZIP 1014. In order to draft something all parties agree on, I would like to form an independent committee comprised of members from ZF, ECC, current/prospective ZOMG members, and key community members.

I will follow up with more info later this week.

EDIT: I was tied up on a few things this week not related to Zcash, and will follow up on the above with a post on Monday morning.


Is there video of this?

Perhaps, moving forward we can record video of ZF/ZOMG/ECC meetings.

I suspect that much of the issue here stems from misinterpretation of positions.

The adversarial ring in this thread for example has all the hallmarks of well-intentioned humans using media that they’re not evolved for as their primary mode of communication.

I believe that you are diligently discharging your duty as Chief Executive of the ZF, which If I Understand Correctly means that you’re responsible for following/applying the framework laid out in ZIP1014. No doubt any perceived devation from ZIP 1014 would be correctly criticised.

My thought is that if the ZOMG requests a change to ZIP1014… isn’t it the ZF’s job to handle ZIP1014 changes?

Isn’t ZIP1014 modifiable by ZCAP vote? Isn’t organizing ZCAP votes the ZF’s responsibility?

As a member of the ZCAP, I’d certainly like to vote on the ZOMG’s recommendations for how the ZOMG is run.

To be clear, I’m much more interested in Unanimous Recommendations of the ZOMG, than partial recommendations of some ZOMG members.

Is it the ZF’s responsibility to enable that vote?

Apologies in advance for my misunderstandings of the structures involved.


I agree with your opinion.


Thanks and regards.

1 Like

A post was split to a new topic: ZOMG & ZCAP information/links

This is a prime example of calling the kettle black.

That said, i agree with you entirely that the ZF is a stagnant bureaucratic aspect of Zcash, that contributes nothing outside of general book keeping. Ever since they came off mommies nipple (dev fee) it has been a downward slippery slope for all of this collectively.

The success case I see, is removing all this incessant complaints from you or you being removed from the team if you cant start critically speaking of your own failures. I do not give a single **** about the qualifications you have, I expected results from the ZOMG, and regardless if your hands were tied, YOU DID NOT deliver. The logical fallacies about the firemen just pissed me off to be honest, I felt insulted that someone using a logical fallacy would be representing Zcash.

I would suggest dissolving both the ZF and the ZOMG committee entirely and starting from the ground up to reform new committees with 0 original members, to actually make this a decentralized bureaucracy instead of this joke you think revolved around your creditability in the world of Fin Tech, which in its own nature is an embarrassment to human evolution. But that is a conversation for another day.

If we dont defer this, we need to dissolve this train wreck imo.

We will be sharing the new election schedule shortly.