Yes, as far as I know he only said it out of mutual interest in developing websites/apps on SAFE. I haven’t ever conversed about Project Decorum with him in private. In fact, I think I never ever conversed with @happybeing in private at all.
I see…would this be in the same manner that you and the other current mods on this forum incorporate feedback from the community? I, along with others have made numerous suggestions in regard to democratising and improving transparency and accountability to the community. Can you please give the community some feedback on what your current track record is for “incoporating feedback from the community” - so we have something to go on?
This is going to be centralised around yourself then, rather than decided by your investor community…right[quote=“Seneca, post:216, topic:8474”]
Who benefits and how?
You’re reading too much into it
Am I? Maybe you’re not reading enough of what I’m asking…if the project is popular due to having many features paid for by the community - who benefits financially? What happens to any profits/excess funds…you decide right?..based on community feedback of course etc etc…[quote=“Seneca, post:216, topic:8474”]
I’m thinking these coins could easily have represented votes for the investors as to which direction the project went or reward systems etc
This would have resulted in a handful of whales being dominant. If you want to risk the direction of a project like this to be controlled by selfish financial interest, that would be the way to go
There are ways to mitigate this - is Safex going to controlled by selfish financial interest? Surely centralising all decisions around 1 person is antithetical to Safe ideals and much more likely to be controlled by selfish financial interest.[quote=“Seneca, post:216, topic:8474”]
At least people here have come to know me
I don’t know you from Adam and there are many instances on this very forum that I have pointed out total inconsistencies in what people say or profess to believe, then act in a totally different manner when given the opportunity if its to their benefit. To ask this particular community to rely on “trust” in any one individual, when this is exactly the one thing we’re trying to get rid of!..lol…the very reason that Maidsafe are developing what it is and smart contracts are around is so that we don’t have to trust any 1 individual.
Removing this and splitting it simply adds fuel to what @AlKafir is saying.
I don’t believe that there was any collusion behind the scenes by mods, that’s just my opinion. That said I do think there should be a clear line between mods and people promoting anything especially other projects on any forum. My feeling is just as many other folks the mods are excited about what Decorum may accomplish. Perhaps more thought needs to go into what mods are allowed to do and say while they wear that hat.
I remember some folks voicing concern when Danniel was running his sale on this forum. A solution needs to be had as to how people are allowed to use this platform to raise money for SAFE related projects. Last thing SAFE needs is a crowdsale gone wrong and to be associated therewith.
Yes, as usual @Al_Kafir you have jumped to conclusions that are wrong. As @Seneca has confirmed - my “support and help” has nothing to do with any expected or agreed involvement in Project Decorum - it was me giving him my energetic encouragement. As you should realise, I don’t have the time to offer much if any practical help beyond a small financial contribution. I also have other fish to fry
I agree that my stance on CLikes and Synereo (thingies) appears to a degree contradictory. I was very challenging to them due both to my concerns about their model of paid promotion and their repeated inability to respond adequately to those concerns. At that time they either suggested that advertising was OK, because flowers do it (for example) or would not work in the way I feared, but without being able to explain why. If during those discussions you understood the what and why, you are a much better analyst and programmer than I, and should seriously consider ditching your paintbrush and diving into helping a perfect you can believe in.
More recently Synereo and I revisited this discussion and their responses were much more candid and helpful. They answered most of my points effectively, but left one final point of concern. I am though now much less concerned about Synereo’s plans than I was - though I remain very much less clear about the motivations and goals of those building and backing it than I am with Project Decorum. I feel that I know @Seneca far better, and so am willing to give him support that I will not be giving to Synereo at this stage. (Also, he’s building on SAFEnetwork - they are not. If they were I’d certainly be more interested). Perhaps that will change and I’ll be converted! Perhaps not
I am still uncomfortable with the idea of paid promotion on Synereo and indeed in Decorum. However, Decorum is being built on SAFEnetwork, and is very well aligned with it’s goals IMO, so I don’t see it as a problem having to lump my discomfort and hold my judgement on one aspect, while there is so much else I like about the project.
@Al_Kafir you seem to want clean lines, black and white categories - and have put the moderators and @Seneca into a “bad/don’t trust on anything” category. This is leading you to into prejudice, and making repeated misjudgements and unjust statements, and it is very tiresome for everyone you take against, and repeatedly smear with false accusations.
I’ve corrected your incorrect assumptions about myself and Project Decorum, but you again made incorrect and misleading statements (the same ones as before) about me and moderators which I am just fed up of. I know it is not only moderators who are sick of these, more than one longstanding member has expressed their frustration over these kinds of remarks and corrective responses, so I will leave it at that. There is much I respect and like about you, but this annoys me. You’ve made those points, they’ve been answered, your bringing them up again and again is unhelpful because you haven’t got anything constructive to offer.
The topic is about the crowdsale of Decorum. The opener of the topic says:
It went off-topic to other crowdfund projects and mods being involved or not. All discussion is here. All replies were moved to here as well. This topic is open for that discussion.
At the very least make it visible to the public not hidden here where nobody will see it.
I made it clear there was a split.
It’s in the topic. It even links to this topic.
It’s the same old accusations and anyone new is going to read it at face value, without the history unless it is answered. But answering it on topic endlessly isn’t any good either. I think it’s the best decision to move it - not ideal but better. It can’t just be left, and it’s unreasonable to have to respond again and again to the same accusations. And it messes up the main discussion.
@Al_Kafir this is the project you’ve been waiting for though man you’ve been demanding!! A forum that democratizes etc; You wanted a new forum software… HERE IT IS; the ants are coming @seneca please don’t let us down!!
I think it’s a bit of a non-discussion. I mean, in every project in general, there are close insiders, almost-close insiders, all the way to outsiders and the ones completely not knowing what’s going on. The insiders might happen to be personal coaches, friends, technical advisors, family, lawyers, mods on a forum, colleagues, etc. etc. Who cares? This Decorum project is open source, with open (public) discussion, it’s a free choice to either contribute or not, so I’m openminded about who might or might not be insider.
Furthermore, I wouldn’t want it otherwise: @Seneca is totally in charge of where this is heading. Multiple captains on one ship, it doesn’t work.
No…it’s not actually. I had hoped for a project that the community was involved in and investors were properly rewarded and had a say - Synereo is much more aligned to what I envisaged.
The similarities between the 2 are striking and I’d support whoever had the idea first. Decorum appears to be Synereo only without the limited coin supply to give some sort of community ownership and instead has ring-fenced, privatised and centralised the power. The “value” proposition in Synereo I get, but this appears to have been stripped out in Decorum by the proposition to give weight to unpaid likes. There appears to be no realistic investment opportunity whatsoever.
Definitely not what I have been “demanding” and wouldn’t touch with a barge- pole.
You know, Al, no one is stopping you from making or getting someone to make exactly the sort of app/protocol you wish and run it on the SAFE Network and make is as democratic as you want. Nor is anyone stopping you from making a competing forum in exactly the form and guidelines set you think most workable.
You can have it as open or closed as you want. You can announce it on this forum just the same as the other projects discussed and crowdsales discussed. Why don’t you do that? And when you do, you can count on mods participating if they find the project and its principals competent and trustworthy, and not participating if they don’t.
If you have a cool app, I’d be happy to talk about it on the SAFE Crossroads podcast, just like I have the others. Has nothing to do with the fact that I am also a mod.
Yes, so you keep saying…nobody is stopping you answering the questions posed regarding Decorum either, but you choose not to. Do you have some kind of problem with community members critiquing projects? Really not sure why your replies are always that I can go somewhere else if I’m not happy with modding or make my own app - this is all obvious and true of anyone and you are again making no point whatsoever. I am a member of the Safe community and choose to stay here and do what I do - I have repeatedly told you this and your comments are less than useful. It comes across as really churlish…
What haven’t I answered, Al?
Well I can’t find where the questions I asked of you in the Decorum thread have disappeared to - the usual trick of moving any of my critical posts off the front page and all over the place has taken care of that and I certainly ain’t continuing talking in a side room with a bunch of mods again…lol.
Decorum - community involved - check
Decorum - investors rewarded - check
Decorum - investors having a say - uncheck
And the unchecked section is really necessary when it comes to the fruition of a vision, if one wants to avoid a sec financially driven output of a project. It’s very dangerous to have investors having a say. They can advice, and advice again, and sell their shares/coins/tokens/endorsements whatever, if they don’t see their advice taken seriously. Investors are not per se experts in the field of the project. That’s a misunderstanding, imho.
I think the above posts belong in the Decorum thread don’t they? When they and my own are put where they belong, I will be happy to rejoin the conversation.
Yes, they are involved in paying for it.[quote=“MyLegacyKit, post:24, topic:8717”]
Decorum - investors rewarded - check
I have checked and fully explained in detail why I believe the value proposition for investors is just not there
Yes, a big massive and very important uncheck. The community are basically paying for the next Zuckerberg, rather than owning it themselves, which would only be fair as they are the ones paying for it. There’s one born every minute I suppose…what are we at now…a couple of hundred grand…lol.
Ah, yes. I remember. You started by insulting and then asked slanted questions.
Now you further your slander by saying you can’t find the post which is at the top of this very thread.
I’m not interested in defending myself against you Al. You can spin that any way you like. Your “concerns” are slanted and disrespectful, and I’m frankly tired of trying to deal with you.
If we had the forum software we’re both hoping Decorum will be, I’d just block you personally because I find that you add nothing of real value to the conversation.
The sad part is that if you were to address very similar questions with respect and not presumption of evil conspiracy against you or whoever, you’d find me quite willing to try to come to understanding. As it is, though, you will think what you think. I have no interest in trying to answer twisted, accusatory questions.
I’m tired of feeding what I consider to be trolling. (and note, I say that as a forum member, not “as a mod”. Yes, I can and do separate what I do as a mod from what I do as a community member.
I’m no mod, just an investor in Decorum lol. And I don’t mind the name of a room, I too noticed this subject was derailing the crowdsale topic. And I have also no issues finding this room, and giving my opinion to whoever is interested.