Oh here is another member that constantly harasses someone including me and not only.
jail != death, but keep pushing that false narrative since you’ve got nothing else. maybe you can kiss chris between the cheeks and get me muted again. until then, cry harder.
Hey, Lordy, I usually go after scamers, bruh. <3
I don’t care if anyone votes No on things they don’t believe in.
I do wonder why you would have votes Yes for my Grant until the final 30 minutes when it reached a majority of Yes votes, then switch to Abstain for 10 minutes, until I once again reached a majority of Yes votes and then switched to No.
I can’t personally think of a reason where a person of integrity would change their votes in such a way over the closing minutes of a grant proposal.
And while that is certainly among the reasons I don’t consider you to be an intellectually honest person acting in the best interest of anyone other than yourself, it is certainly not the full extant of reasons you have demonstrated to be untrustworthy.
Are there any existing members of a DAO core team willing to speak up on your behalf and say that we are mistaken and you aren’t just trying to take credit for the work others have already done?
I don’t need the DAO core team to speak up on my behalf. I am a Decentraland DAO Delegate -Community servant. The decisions of the DAO will speak on my behalf, and I will respect them no matter what they may be.
Someone with some insight into your actual ability to plan “strategically” would be nice.
The Peter principle is a concept in management developed by Laurence J. Peter which observes that people in a hierarchy tend to rise to “a level of respective incompetence”: employees are promoted based on their success in previous jobs until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent, as skills in one job do not necessarily translate to another.
It’s okay to acknowledge that maybe this job isn’t best suited to you at this time.
I think if you listen to the strategic facilitation session recordings, it is clear Fede is the one bringing strategic value and doing most of the work…They should be on the youtube channel, and I believe you’ve been at many of them. But if you watch the first 10 minutes of this session, I think it’s very clear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l35eMKaifhU
From the beginning the Strategic Unit Grant felt more like an attempt to get a specific representative into a core unit position, rather than bringing strategic value to the DAO, particularly as it significantly overlapped with existing roles and responsibilities of the Facilitation Squad, and was not coordinated in anyway, where duplicated work could have been avoided. I believe the Unit takes credit for work that others do or are doing, and that there has been very little added strategic value from this squad.
In fact, before I pushed back on it, the proposal that is being used now as the fait acompli for the squads existence, to maintain an updated DAO Organization chart, was delegated to every other core unit except the Strategic Unit. The only thing being put forward by the Strategic Unit was the proposal itself. And the facilitation squad was being asked to do research for the chart, write the text, create the visuals, the governance squad to update the website, and the facilitation squad to keep it updated. It was only after I diplomatically suggested that as the person making the proposal, the Strategic Unit, should probably have some role in implementing it, rather than calling on every other strategic unit to do all the work for them. Interesting how that is now a central piece of the policy to maintain accountability for the DAO…
That said, I disagree with this pathway, and see this as only a sanction, as I have in other instances where is not an established governance power. If this passes the grant should be escalated by the GSS to the revocations committee and go through the proper procedure, and given the due process as it has been established.
If we are going to establish a second pathway to send Grants to the Revocations Committee, then we should also consider constituting it through a Governance Proposal, and assess the impacts and implementation pathways in the process.
lordlike would start crying about hate speech as soon as the two bobs from office space asked, “what would you say you do here?”
I don’t usually like to point on my own achievements, but when someone tries to undermine my contributions, I feel compelled to set the record straight.
I am a Community member who initially proposed creating a strategy for the DAO, managing the DAO Treasury, and establishing a Code of Ethics. Additionally, I’ve cast over 700 DAO votes and rank among the top three DAO proposal authors.
Following my proposals, strategic and financial planning working groups were established, which I continue to facilitate.
While I consider Fede to be a talented, smart, and valuable member of the Community, it doesn’t mean that I’m merely copying others or that my grant should be revoked. Such statements have no place in a DAO. I’ve already addressed similar comments from your team in the forum link below.
Btw several other Core Unit members have expressed their support for individuals like me to receive grants and contribute to the DAO. I don’t aim to replace anyone; I simply want to work for DAO in areas where I’ve already made an impact.
The constant discussions about revoking my grant are stressful. Responding to these criticisms consumes time, energy, and emotional bandwidth.
Regarding the Organizational Chart, I’ve provided my feedback in the document that I shared with you and others. I have said that I can do it myself if required. I also mentioned to Fede during our call that I’m open to modifying the implementation pathway. The only reason I included the Facilitation Squad was that they are responsible for DAO Onboarding, and I thought it appropriate to at least offer it. I am sorry if in such way I hurt your any feelings, I really wanted to do the best.
I’m not perfect, and I can’t please everyone, but I am committed to doing my best for Decentraland and the DAO. Whether you like it or not, I have my opinions. Also, a grant is not a mechanism to force me out; even if it’s revoked, I will continue to be an active member of the DAO. In my opinion, it’s better to find consensus and focus on building for the sake of the DAO, rather than comparing who is better or who deserves to be a Core Unit. Please respect my desire to build and work for the DAO.
The DAO is not a place for specific Core Units only; there must be equal opportunities for others as well.
Why is the primary defense you’ve presented for yourself been “look how much the other core units have cost!?”
This was what @web3nit was able to list for the 120 hours of work he was supposed to do over the first month.
Half of this list is at best a day’s worth of work.
My first Strategic Unit’s Grant Update:
Strategic Unit Grant Update
Also, I missed to include in Grant Update that I submitted governance proposal “DAO Organizational Chart”.
Org chart is the heart of DAOs structure and onboarding.
The key aspect of this proposal is that it sets guidelines for the chart’s content and mandates accountability at the governance level, specifying which Core Units are responsible for its upkeep.
Without timely updates and responsible ones for that, the chart might not reflect the current DAO structure, leading to misunderstanding.
I spend 30 hours a week fully immersed in Decentraland DAO, dedicating the majority of my thoughts and time to it. I’m also actively engaged in frequent communication with Community members.
1st month was pretty tough. The constant discussions and doubts about my grant are stressful. Responding to these criticisms consumes time, energy, and emotional bandwidth.
But I am strong enough to outlive all this negative and continue building for Decentraland and DAO.
I think about DCL all day long, I should probably get paid 16 hours a day between the time I’m “fully immersed” in reading the discord and the rest of the day where I’m dedicating my thoughts to Decentraland.
Thank you for taking the time to give your thoughts on the matter! As far as using this pathway (governance proposals) to acheive the task, I did just want to take a minute to note that I have filled out the form with the GSS to take the prooper route in revoking a grant. The reason for creating a poll prior to that was really to see how the community felt and to be able to give the results of the poll to the GSS as well Just to be transparent about my intentions here, I also don’t really think a governance proposal alone should be able to revoke a grant when we have a voted-in system to do so but wanted to get the ball rolling in terms of gathering community feedback and providing any helpful insight from the comments that I may have overlooked to be considered during the process.
Should we remove the Strategic Unit and prevent $32k in DAO funds from being spent?
This proposal is now in status: FINISHED.
- Revoke the strategic unit grant 40% 6,816,275 VP (72 votes)
- Allow the strategic unit to continue 59% 10,108,837 VP (31 votes)
- Invalid question/options 1% 12,854 VP (7 votes)
Thank you, Everyone, for your support.
Sometimes it’s not easy to pave the way, gauge Community sentiment, but it’s my job to do so. I will continue to do my best for Decentraland and the DAO in pursuing strategic initiatives.
“You can’t be all things to all people.”- Michael Porter.
Clearly, you still need to work on “gauging community sentiment” since “everyone” isn’t who you should be thanking.
Should we remove the Strategic Unit and prevent $32k in DAO funds from being spent?
This proposal has been REJECTED by a DAO Committee Member (0xbef99f5f55cf7cdb3a70998c57061b7e1386a9b0)