We are here not to listen about how you confused
You confusion is not the topic, stop to spam
@Moderator, can you block tis troll - @Long_Live_Cosmos ?
1 Like
When maybe you should show the receipts or any documents publicly and stop playing these games with dm, proof in private dialogs and etc?
No.
This is not what the community pool is for. You canât just do something and expect ATOM holders to pay for it.
Please letâs stop this precedent. Itâs not personal, this is just not how a legitimate ecosystem runs.
In my mind, the CP is OFF LIMITS until AA DAO shuts down and something is designed to take its place.
8 Likes
Maybe you should to stop to hide your personality?
If you want to participate in public discussion, you need to be responsible for your words and opinions
And until you are private person, all your opinions is opinion of unknown user, and we will not respect such opinions
All private persons need to be declined to particpate in public questions
1 Like
Sorry, friends, can you clearify?
Is it means, that Community Pool of Cosmos Hub is not for the development of Cosmos Hub?
1 Like
No, I donât â and there are a few reasons for that.
First of all, we are in a decentralized space, and there is no rule that says we must be public. On the contrary, there are rules against being offensive â and as far as I remember, you were involved in a situation where your comments were deleted by forum admins because they were considered aggressive and inappropriate.
Secondly, most users on this forum donât use their real names or photos â and thatâs completely normal. Privacy is a fundamental principle here. We donât even do KYC when creating Cosmos wallets, because thatâs what true decentralization is all about.
Moreover, when people vote on proposals from their own wallets, they also donât reveal their identities â they just vote. Thatâs the essence of decentralization.
Thirdly, around 90% of the accounts that supported you are also private and recently created. So if you are against private accounts, then logically their opinions shouldnât be taken into account either.
Finally, just because someone disagrees with you doesnât make them a troll or a hater. People are allowed to have different opinions â and thatâs completely normal.
3 Likes
Hello 
Do you know who enables people like you (PostHuman Validator) to vote in governance?
Right. People like StunZeed and all the other âprivateâ individuals you seem to despise.
You: âPrivate people donât matter.â
Also you: Voting in governance using our private stake.
Make it make sense.
Like it or not, the votes you cast exist because of us. The very people you just dismissed.
Thatâs not how decentralized governance is supposed to work. And honestly, you should know better.
3 Likes
So I think we just disagree about these conferences. Who cares that weâre not represented at Berlin Blockchain Week? This is something that literally only a couple hundred people care about max, and theyâre already knowledgeable about blockchain if theyâre flying to a conference. 20k is an insane amount to spend on something this low value in my opinion. CP has funded worse - YouTube videos and Tendermint Timmyâs HTML page - but why would we backpay something not authorized in the first place? If this was something where CP funds were desired, the proposal should be submitted ahead of time. My ZKP app also didnât get funded for 20k, and that was a working product with a proven use case. Why should I support rich people having fun at a conference? How is that more value added?
One more high quality overviw of the InterChain Summit
Soon will be more
Next video starts with Jake Hartnell.
Camera looks like from 2013
Btw, you fancying up your videos doesnât change the fact that youâve unwilling to bring some transparency into your numbers. Oh, and requiring doxxing to you in DMs to get transparency is also against the ethos of governance. Peak irony writing âkyc killsâ and âprivacy is the future ..â on your cardboard at this event.
Quoting the bot from your tg group:
You can ignore the part about your validator coin. Idc about that part.
1 Like
Bit late to the party - was OOO these past 2 weeks - but we would also vote against this proposal (not NWV however, I donât think it warrants it at all).
Irrespective of the receipts / invoices or quality & usefulness of the videos, the CP cannot be used to backpay for expenses that were engaged through a personal initiative. This would set a very wrong precedent and it cannot happen.
5 Likes
Iâll just elaborate on the NWV.
calling people who disagree toxic trolls and telling them they donât matter if they donât want to doxx themselve is insulting and against our values and what we stand for. (It also contradicts with what Posthuman claims to be standing for).
This, plus the fact that heâs asking for an amount that he does not want to verify makes it a spam proposal.
We would call any proposal that asks for a RANDOM unverified number of money a spam proposal.
Anyways.. good day, highstakes!
1 Like
Yes, those are valid points â and given the tense discussion you had with him I absolutely understand that youâd choose this option.
I suspect it is a moot point however as I doubt the proposal will make it on-chain, especially now that even Mag turned it down.
Cheers mate!
1 Like
I easily can provide Irrespective of the receipts / invoices, we will add them to proposal, if we will up it
Quality of videos are very good, just quality of online streaming wasnât really good
Here is one more video from the InterChain Summit:
https://x.com/BlockhuntersOrg/status/1942258218052223386
More interviews will be published soon, just high-quality content takes time to edit
So, if I will provide all the invoices, and you will see more and more hQ content, will you vote yes?
Nobody cares about opinion of private user, you donât responsible for your reputation with your words, so your word cost nothing
But, anyway, I will not up this proposal
Looks like decentralized governance in Cosmos totally broken
We will wait until the creating of AAA, and will vote YES to give them funds from the Community Pool
And for decentralized governance - we have a whole topic on the forum: Unknown users have every right to write there any nonsense that comes to their mind. Give them the opportunity to be in the holy delusion that their opinion matters
What I meant was that the provision of these receipts wasnât the primary reason for declining to support this endeavour.
The main reasons are that the CP is not meant for that, + bad precedent.
I should also note that this video may have a good quality, but it seems to be essentially about you and Posthuman so itâs more of a PR stunt than an advocacy of ATOM and itâs really not a good example.
4 Likes
Hey, I was honestly ready to leave this discussion because your replies have started sounding repetitive, and to be honest, a bit weird and even offensive.
However, I just looked back at the first version of your latest post and wanted to ask â does it imply that small validators and nameless Forum/Telegram users donât matter?
Donât you think this comes off as egotistical and kind of anti-decentralization?
It really feels like youâre dismissing the contribution of the broader community, which goes directly against the principles of decentralization many of us care about.
Moreover, I strongly believe that even the AAA DAO wonât support you on this proposal.
You havenât provided any documentation or proof â no receipts, no references â because it seems like you simply donât have them.
It honestly looks like youâve just made up the numbers on the spot and trying to get CP money.
2 Likes
Moreover, doesnât it seem contradictory that youâre calling for rational spending and allocation of CP, yet at the same time asking to support your completely irrational and useless expenditure?
3 Likes
Ouch lmfao. Posthuman is a hypocrite. Calling for decentralization but god forbid small validators and ârandom telegram usersâ have and share their opinion.
3 Likes