No been in this space since 2017. I dare because I can…
3 Likes
Just put Vegas name at he multisign offchain wallet and everything will go smoothly. 
Ed keep the good work eat some popcorn and let the children fight who will get the toy 
. I hope lunc survives
1 Like
It is depend on the asset… and what is the purpose and use of that asset…
There is a chasm between ideal and reality. Let’s face the reality. We need a more efficient execution layer for this fund.
6 Likes
I think it not very polite that after a couple of days after posting this proposal, to put it up for voting (maybe Vegas didnt make the proposal in TS).
Discussion is still ongoing, and to put this up for voting after such a short time, doesnt feel right to me. Alex at least had the decentcy to wait for comments from community. And not put it up for voting after only couple of days.
Also Ed commented that the proposal as written cant pass.
Please try to come together and make another proposal, that works for all.
Ill vote no
9 Likes
No with veto.
Too much rushed proposal
6 Likes
-
Process
The method you have used here to gain influence over the chains future is exactly why some decisions need to be made by grown ups.
You have short circuited a governance proposal procedure for your own ends and not followed the full consultative process and given the community a reasonable period to respond. Thereby you are abusing the process you support for your own agenda, this in itself is grossly irregular and an abuse of power.
This is perfect example of why a community governance vote on every spend is not always going to result in what is best for the chain. Logic and not emotion should prevail. -
Developer reward
You often fly the banner that the devs should be rewarded. Two of the three most committed and valued devs in the LUNC active dev community are on this ‘advisory group’, (Marventus declined because he has in real life priorities) so following your own arguments this $5k per month goes towards supporting them. Zaradar and Ed have essentially been what TR and you claim as ‘TR Devs’, with Ed also being a valued partner of TerraCVita. Lets make this 100% clear without Ed and Zaradars guidance and actions, Alex’s commitment to exploring new solutions and Coach Bruce’s coralling and championing of the community, knowledge and contacts LUNC would not have survived. These have all at times averted single points of failure or enabled a door to be discovered and opened. Original thinkers not piggybacking off others ideas and seeking public support for it. You have ‘when it suited you’ argued vehemently that Ed specifically is a leading thinker in the ecosystem, but only when it meets your needs.
. -
Timeliness
Without active timely investment this chain will not survive. I am confident this group where possible will seek to consult with the community, and where a road map or longer term decision making can be put to the community they will. Ed is an Educator it is in his DNA, he’s done more to consult with the community on this LUNC project than any other, where he can i have confidence he will strive to steer this group that way. -
Misleading
It very much concerns me that as a validator and active community member you have set up this devisive vote that will only harm the very community you argue to support. Actions like this may lead to the loss of $4m of extremely important investment to facilitate improvements. Investment that currently is unavailable.
26 Likes
In my point of view, this quoted text should be review, in the last @ek826 proposed discussion…
The direct point is: We must continue Decentralized and, as mentioned in the first proposal, 9 persons can’t have the power to decide. If we also consider their voting power, they will Centralize and decide both proposals, and all revenue / shares / incomes? That’s not the real deal!
I don’t know how you can think of making such an open proposal to the community, you should take the validator thing a little more seriously.
2 Likes
How about you quit shaming yourself with your assumptions, and learn how to communicate with maturity,
2 Likes
Bravo 
5 Likes
Thank you for standing up to the biggest bully of the chain, it was long due!
7 Likes
Bravo! Cyber cop 
it’s sad to see people say no to this and embrace what will essentially become TFL 2.0.
yes vote from me.
1 Like
I voted YES
1 Like
I believe that what is mentioned here is also extremely serious. Since there are several fallacies that occur in the stated points.
With respect to point 1. As you rightly say here “Logic and not emotion must prevail”. I think it is appropriate to say, that in a chain that claims to be decentralized, there cannot be a proposal of centrality and discretionality of action as marked as that of Alex. This would be to use logic. Where clearly and for all to see, he makes a proposal where he clearly “supports his own agenda” and that of some of TR. So here you do not seem to apply logic in what you are saying and also use the influence they have. First fallacy.
Regarding point 2. Every human being has virtues and flaws. Nobody is perfect. Neither Michael Jordan nor Diego Armando Maradona. Each one of us, can support those things that “we see well and we agree” and not support in others that we consider incorrect. Not because he is an “idol” of whatever, we can approve everything he proposes. Therefore, we can support and not support according to what we see as right and wrong of that person. It is natural to every human being. Second fallacy.
Regarding point 3. Here by saying “Without active and timely investment, this chain will not survive.” It seeks to generate fear in a specific circle of influence. Communicating that only self-chosen people can carry out such a task. Ed. will be an efficient educator. But he should not be the only one in millions in this community. Just like the developers. What is asked of each of the “chosen ones”, is the same as in any working relationship, a clear work proposal, the budget that such work will demand, how much time will be used to develop it and what date it is estimated that the development can be concluded. Surely there are thousands of developers in this community who will be able to do the job. Third Fallacy.
Fourth Fallacy. “Actions like this can lead to the loss of $4 million of extremely important investment to facilitate improvements.” It appears that TR and Alex “own” that money. Since if what they say is not done, the community…would lose that money!!! What kind of argument is this in a decentralized chain? The community can elect its appointed members for that purpose, and claim said millions to be used then as the Community sees fit. Or is DK only willing to give TR and Alex that money and not the community?
Therefore, it seems to me extremely important to reflect on what has been said. Good day to all. Regards
3 Likes
Although I do support on-chain voting for important issues, I think this proposal is a bit too generic. By saying ‘[…]you are agreeing that all distribution of funds has to be done via on-chain voting’ you lock yourself in for all future decisions, no matter how small. Tbh, I think Jay’s idea is the best. That way dev’s can be funded from a fixed pool without having to ask the community permission for everything you do.
Another matter…I’m quite shocked by some responses from the community. They lack any form of respect and I wonder if the majority even understands the topics discussed. Maybe we should make replies to discussions 18+ 
This ties in nicely with what I wrote yesterday.
For those who do not know KPIs stands for Key Performance Indicators. Also called benchmarks.
This unusual instance calls for an outside of the box solution. Let’s get it done and move on.
1 Like
Dear Community, because Binance still attack us, We have to make a very good and clear decision for a chain and for investors. For me is only one way, DAO… Therefore we have to show together determination in divide the money, an show your path straight and honest for all holders and users. I think yes for a this propossal.
It is so sad to see a self proclaimed leader with his minions became part of LUNC team who totally have no knowledge.
-
Look and review all the AMA that he attended.
Getting defensive and rejecting other ideas when he “think” its not good. When anyone professional talk about ecosystem and utilities, its stuff that my grandma can utter out of his mouth. We need someone who have vision, knowledge and not lost & live in his own world. -
Look at the LUNC telegram that they set up. How can a green face be the logo of the community? Its absurd.
Whenever there are different voices, the minions will auto ban and shut down those voices. At least now they are mild and give warning but sure feel it’s a dictator in control in unfree world. -
Look at the type of proposal in Terra station that he submitted. Again lack of knowledge and professionalism. SMH.
Time is of the essence and he is still trying to create hurdle. If some many pro move in same direction, he should use his brain and ponder why he is moving in different direction and wasting precious time.
8 Likes