Look at those two messages, and tell me what mindset belongs to the Cypherpunk movement and is representing our values:
1
You probably know what’s happening in Turkey because you’ve seen the Pikachu videos from the protests. So you know some context.
Today, one of the largest rallies took place, gathering hundreds of thousands, (unofficially) around 2 million people in a square built for 3 million.
The protests are evolving into a full-scale boycott of entities controlled by the state — institutions that ignore the country’s reality, throttle internet bandwidth, curate what people watch, and try to shape how they think.
Imo, people in Turkey are among the strongest potential users of what Web3 services can actually provide.
After nearly a decade of economic crisis, the younger generation is already full of airdrop hunters, with a high risk appetite, driven by the hope of escaping a prolonged sense of economic depression.
But this goes just beyond economic survival: has become about censorship resistance, permissionless access, and the right to communicate, transact, and organize without needing approval.
If anyone offer services to people actively resisting centralized control, they will use them.
But only if those services are simple enough for even a grandma to use.
So here’s the situation:
The problem exists.
The reaction exists.
The demand exists.
The user exists.
Whoever can deliver Web3 services that meet these movements, meet the real problems that exist around the world today tomorrow can capture the very real users they’ve been searching for.
Do you think the leader of ECC can be trusted to “gauge sentiment” in the poll he is organizing? After so blatantly saying one thing and doing the opposite?
We are going astray and this is thanks to organizations and people that have stayed in control of the dev fund longer than they initially promised they would.
We are going astray. Time for a major course correction.
I personally have and always have trusted all the leaders in the ecosystem. I would do the same thing if I were in everyone’s shoes. They come from the best long-term motivations. They may make mistakes in some cases, just like any of us living human beings. But all mistakes have always been acknowledged. Even the ones that weren’t mistakes, and many realize it years later. It is a special skill of diplomacy to be on the same page with the community. Mistrust is out of the question.
Whichever system is chosen, I will listen to the leaders because I know they are long-term Zcash holders just like me. We are in the same team and we are moving in the same direction.
In fact, anyone can dip into Arborist Calls and figure out who’s who there. It’s important to realize how broad Zcash is today with many development units. Not only different teams, but also a huge geography of time zones. All of these people coordinate their actions amongst themselves. And if there is a failure somewhere, everyone is lagging behind at the same time. Just dig a little deeper. And then you can see why chaotic things happen. Why we sometimes don’t get the improvements that are on the roadmap on time. All roadmaps are very tentative. Josh can’t influence everyone. People are scattered all over the world. It’s all built on trust. Most people in general are just hired for dollars. They got involved in Zcash in the process, but initially they were just looking for work like every other person on the planet - looking for work for bills because you have to eat food, pay rent, and so on. That’s how the real world works. Even if we want to defeat centralization, we live in the real world with taxation of developers, with the existence of expenses, with a system of labor relations. How do you take all that and break it all? So what? Do we expect that to get us closer to our goal in some way? I don’t think so. It’s going to take us infinitely further away from the goal. So if you want to change the system to break it, that’s a mistake. Your millions will turn to rubble. And you’ll itself be the cause of it. The consequences can be irreversible.
Let’s change the system to improve it, not break it.
I stand by everything I said. It’s purposefully succinct and to the point.
Now,
Funny you mention. I do trust @Dodger. We’re not sharing the same values or long term view, but there’s no question what he stands for. I don’t really know for @joshs, he says one thing and does another, it’s fundamentally problematic from my perspective.
Just the way Satoshi envisioned. Do you read yourself and consider that maybe something is wrong?
As soon as we get PoS we can fix this, but the first step is to acknowledge the problem. The second step is to implement a temporary fix (100% decision from stakeholders on dev fund).
You know what else is important in the real world? Not stealing from stakeholders. Unless you’re in some communist country. But I thought we’ve made super videos about how Zcash was a US crypto (implying good ol’ US values).
Why the dramatic turn? I see you do not trust ZEC stakeholders to understand what must be funded. Well that’s a major difference with me. I am confident fellow ZEC stakeholders are perfectly fit to take on that role. If they are properly informed by the community, it will certainly improve the quality of their decisions.
Something has to break, and it’s the attitude too many of you have against ZEC stakeholders.
I’m just adamantly opposed to moving into the realm of “trust issues”. It causes me personal resentment.
I’m being logical. If we lose a coin holder tomorrow, it will be painful, but probably short-lived. Because it’s a trivial market process, and there are still enough people in this world, including me (I have invested far more in Zcash than I could withdraw now), who will take the opportunity to support the project again. Because I believe in what we’re doing.
But if tomorrow we lose the leader, who has the trust and confidence of the developers and knows all the details of coordination, or the possibility of development in principle - that’s when I won’t be able to support the project. I will realize that this is a fiasco. And nothing good will happen from here on - that’s it. The development is over for an indefinite period of time.
One of my early posts on this forum before it was decided to extend development funding for the next 4 years was denunciatory in nature. I called it extortion. But time passed and I deleted it and sorted it all out. It’s just the reality of this world. If you want to build something, it will take resources. I know the whole system from the inside now. And know that no one in it is eating their piece of bread without contributing - I am doubly ashamed of that post. But what can you do, sometimes you have to dive into the process to find out what no one is talking about. So Josh started making reports for each week available. That’s why we got these Arborist Calls. That’s why ZCG requires closing milestones of works. All to be transparent to the community. No one here has ever spent millions of dollars to rebrand a logo or contracted to advertise Zcash in a stadium - the kind of corrupt stuff that everyone in the crypto industry abuses. No! Everything is as transparent as possible. So trust issues are not relevant at all. I trust.
Other than that, I’m not trying to argue. I am convinced that your motives also have the right goals, which are the same as my goals, Josh’s goals, and the goals of all the other holders. The only thing we may not have in common is the means of accomplishing the goal. That’s the part we call decentralization.