Moving the Dev Fund discussion forward

[Dodger]

@joshs

Both as the CEO of ECC and a ZCAP voter, I am disappointed in your approach, blatant disregard of the community’s voice, and believe that what you put forward is unnecessarily constrained and reflects a clear bias.

Josh, I’m geniunely mystified by your stance on this.

I could understand the intensity of your opposition if this poll was intended to be determinant (to borrow @gordonesTV’s terminology) but I believe that we have been clear that the purpose of this poll is not to reach a formal decision but, instead, to solicit feedback from the community that ZF will then use to draft a proposal that can be evaluated and discussed alongside other proposals (including yours).

@Dodger

…poll the community in as open and unrestricted a way as we can (within the practical constraints that we face) to see if a consensus approach emerges, and then turn that into a draft ZIP for the community to evaluate alongside the other options that have been put forward.

@Dodger

The purpose of this poll is to try to construct a proposal based on the community’s response to this (and subsequent) polls.

@Dodger

We’ll make it clear that this is an exploratory poll, rather than a “final decision”-style poll.

We’re not disregarding the community’s voice. We’re ensuring that the community’s voice can be heard.

I urge you to recognise and acknowledge that I’m not suggesting that the outcome of these polls is intended to be the final decision, and that this process is intended to produce a proposal that can be evaluated as an alternative to yours and the other proposals.

I also urge you to give @Shawn’s suggestion serious consideration. At some point, we need to agree on how a determinant poll should be worded. As things stand, it’s hard to see how we’ll be able to reach agreement unless we seek the help of an independent and unbiased third-party.