This is for discussion, how we can make Decentralized Governance more decentralized, and to prevent centralization of governance by the small centralized groups
Let’s understand how it works in real, and how we can make it works better, in the interests of the community and Cosmos Development
If Cosmos Forum is so important part of creating proposals, then this forum need to be the same decentralized as cosmos hub governance, otherway we will have very terrible scenarios
And here is a situation, that made me to think about it, because before I was trully belive, that Cosmos Forum is an example of freedom and decentralization, but…
We’ve made a community call, where we explain how decentralized governance works in Cosmos
There we inform community, that all proposals can be discussed (and need to be discussed) on a forum
Many community members joined the forum, but now, several of them wrote to community chat, that their accounts are holded without any reasons
It’s possible that now, new accounts freshly created can’t post on the forum without a minimum of read time and engagement. I guess this kind of changes can only be made by an admin.
Can we at least confirm if this is new accounts or old accounts ? I never had any issue
Personally I support this change because after several years of following proposals and discussion here, 99% of the time you see many new accounts posting it always have been some sort of either bots or uninformed users that have probably been brigaded on Discord’s quests or twitter to make a post only to support a proposal or project they are most likely invested in, flooding the forum discussion with not relevant messages (like : Yeahhhhh LFG I support this proposal), then never come back. Forum is suppose to be a place of discussion, not Tiktok’s comment section so it seems fair to request a minimum of read time.
I feel this has more to do with the fact that you’re pissed that your funding proposal didn’t went as expected, looks like more a vendetta than genuine concerns, if not, why did you wait 5 years to make it ? Also, in one post you say private and unknown entities shouldn’t have the right to give their opinion if they are not doxed, but here you propose a decentralized forum where obviously people will not be doxed?
I think your proposal didn’t get support not because of a cartel you speak of but because the proposal was poorly made. I’m a simple users/delegators and I would have vote NO because =
zero proof of the expenses… we are suppose to trust you on numbers that go to your pocket.
Happy about new accounts that support you but become aggressive when known users don’t support you, calling them trolls or liar.
Thanks! Yeah UI wouldn’t be as smooth as this just because each post would have to be a wallet interaction with some low fee and backend would need to be IPFS pages that get updated. Simple from a technical standpoint (and already done like I said with some tweaking), but there’d have to be some push from “higher” to say that’s the new official place or I don’t see anyone using it.
Could it be just the logging that goes throw the wallet connexion, giving info like past interactions, confidence score.. etc but the rest (messages) aren’t on-chain ? avoiding the repetitive sign Tx for each interaction. I don’t really see the need for the conversation itself to be on-chain but rather the account
Definitely could. It sounded like the original posting user was primarily concerned with censorship resistance though. With a Web2 backend, stuff could still get removed. Unless you had a specific implementation in mind that gets around this?
After discussing this issue in the chat, I decided to join the forum and check the nuances of its work)
Knowing about the rather strict requirements for “newbies” on the forum, I decided not to write posts or comment right away)
So, I registered 20 days ago, during this time I received the Badges: “Autobiographer”, “Enthusiast” and “First Like”.
It remains to check whether these are sufficient requirements to avoid blocking a “newbie”)
If it is impossible to quickly influence the mechanism of blocking “innocents”, then at least you need to understand the algorithm of its work in order to help inexperienced users avoid it)
@Antropocosmist
Blocked after the first message on Sunday 31.08.2025, and today 01.09.2025 the account was checked and the message was added to the feed. By the way, it’s not that bad
According to feedback from Sochat users, it happened faster for me, but it seems to me that it may be related to the fact that I read the posts, liked them, etc.)
We can hardly imagine forum administrators blacklisting community participation. That said, at Govmos we will always support and encourage initiatives that aim to strengthen governance transparency and decentralization.
Some of the proposed solutions you outlined are indeed interesting, and a few appear straightforward to implement. For example, the idea of electing a community representative with elevated permissions—granted admin status solely for the purpose of reporting—could be enacted immediately. This role would ensure that any community member requesting visibility over administrative actions could receive transparent and accountable updates.
Regarding the broader suggestion of migrating away from this forum toward a more decentralized platform, we agree this is a direction worth considering for the future. However, from our perspective, it does not currently appear to be a pressing priority.
Above all, we want to thank you for raising these concerns and putting forward thoughtful proposals to improve our governance processes. This type of constructive engagement reflects the spirit we value in the Cosmos community
Did you actually read the whole thing—or even watch the video? He literally targets me, framing me as a “troll” just because I choose to exercise my right to privacy and remain anonymous (this is crypto, after all).
A “troll,” simply because I opposed a proposal where he’s asking for money without providing any receipts or proof of expenses.
Is this really the spirit of Cosmos—dismissing people as “unserious trolls” just because they choose to stay undoxxed? Compare the time and effort I’ve put into this versus him.
This thread resulted after criticizing his proposal.
He literally wants to censor me. @Govmos you better seriously have a closer look who you praise as an example of the lovely spirit we want to see in cosmos.
We encourage taking a step back to assess the situation with the necessary distance. To clarify: we do not endorse any individual here, nor do we support personal criticism or labeling anyone as a troll. Our intention was simply to put forward a practical idea to strengthen transparency and accountability.
Specifically, as outlined earlier, we suggested electing a community representative with admin status solely for reporting purposes:
In our view, it is essential that this role comes with no authority to act—only the ability to oversee and access admin logs. The representative would not hold powers to censor, approve, or reject actions. The goal is to ensure oversight, not control.
We want to be clear that we are not taking sides in the disagreements between individuals. Our sole concern is identifying a potential governance issue and offering a low-risk, non-intrusive solution. Even if this mechanism proves ineffective in practice, it carries little downside and could help build trust.
For these reasons, we see it as a net benefit worth considering, and we support moving the discussion forward on this basis.
