To sum it up, you had good reasons. They are good reasons because your tone is the right one and your intentions are pure.
You keep misusing the term “personal attack.” It doesn’t apply. The criticism was always directed at ZM’s work and role as grant recipients. Feel free to use my direct quotes with links to back up your claims.
Say what you want about my tone, but a week later the community got the change it’s been asking for “nicely” for months: ZM withdrew their grant freeing up $400K of ZCG funds. Perhaps to avoid further scrutiny?
That’s one way to massively downplay what happened.
Surprisingly, I had no intention to reflect on the unsolicited lecture from a hostile stranger with an obvious bias, a bad ZCG voting record, and a well-documented inability to reflect on community feedback.
That’s a good clip. Wrong context for it, but good clip. I wish Zcash Media didn’t sit on it for 2 years. I also wish entitled individuals would stop taking advantage of our community’s good nature so blatantly, weaponizing it when it suits them.
No reason to think that, but regardless of their future performance (which hundreds of thousands of $$$$$$ later is still a huge question mark given the astronomical cost/view), those videos were shamelessly overpriced and could’ve been made for a fraction of what was paid out. They also should’ve contained clear Zcash-focused CTAs with at least a decent click-through rate. Marketing 101. Video views alone are not a significant marketing metric.
The only reason we’re still talking about this is because you continue to bring up ZM as an example of “top notch” work while running for re-election. Your candidacy is open to discussion.