Do agree with the last point, if that many go it's not necessarily a positive.
Regarding the amount available, a solid chunk of the pool is somewhat pre-spent (for lack of a better word there).
Again not against the proposal at all, simply saying that if 6 ANO's took the offer today, it would...
If the take up rate is even slightly significant there'd be no grant pool left to fund it. There's only ~27,000 FCT in there right now.
Have no problems with the proposal but the practicalities involved could be a problem.
The 28 leaders is a hardcoded value that could be reduced as needed though? It would be a clunky way to do it every update but not necessarily impossible. ANO's could announce in advance and then decommission when the next version is released.
What processes need automating most urgently? A fair bit of the role requires a human touch.
Auto-announcements and transcribing meeting notes could be some low hanging fruit but don't seem overly important.
Completely agree, truly a statesman tasked with many roles and a diplomatic steward of the community.
Have huge respect for everything you've done here Tor, always impressed with your comments and actions, hope you stick around in some way. It would a lesser place without you.
Certainly respect this, the metrics will always be a rough approximation and understand you do a lot that is unspoken, yet still stand by the point that quantifying these matters makes governance a lot simpler for everyone required to vote.
Having clear, concise numbers on this matter can't...
Do agree. My point is there's a lot of lost source code out there on potential goldmines.
Some projects are ahead of their time or didn't have the right team. Hiding that away from the world in shame shouldn't be the default.
Open sourcing factom fails should be the norm. Doesn't matter how bad...
The community will likely fund anything with the slightest bit of potential. Many seem incapable of talking about what they are doing nor at least open source their code when it doesn't work out.
I don't see why anyone here should fund other people's riskless ventures. Feel free to debate that.
There's basically zero risk involved here with failire, no free market works like this, it's a recipe for disaster as evidenced by history. There needs to be an incentive for people to succeed.
Hopefully others can see my point of view here.
I understand this Neil's but this is a public community with everyone's money being spent on unspecified proprietary projects, think ANO's should be taking the risk first and then when ready to go public all the community backs them for runway and marketing.
Been plenty of time for "trust me"...
Looking at the chains in the last few months who would you say is biggest contributor to usage in that list?
There's an unnamed party here who makes far more entries and doesn't say a word about it in public. Highly respect that.
Fair call Tor, I'm still going to defend it though.
I'd be interested in seeing a rolling tally of efficiency/month, not just the face value as a few weeks ago we went to 15%.
Many projects have had plenty of time to prove themselves at lower efficiency before this standing system came in and...
Wouldn't people spend far more time trying to impress the gatekeepers and win them over to support a proposal rather than build something of value to the community? Would be rife for some corruption too. It seems like a regression.
Perhaps a quadratic voting model could solve some of the...