Redesigning Paladin Governance

[Figue]

@Dydymoon

Wtf did you really deleted my message & closed the topic so I can’t repost, despite the vote still being live ? This is going too far.

Once again, you are distorting the truth, we always stopped discussions on forums during a vote, this is a custom. If you feel we should add it into forum rules then sure, we can add them via a vote.

@Dydymoon

Spent my Sunday morning answering to you in detail to justify my rework vote, so repost it yourself since you saved it, I lost enough time on this.

Glad to see you behave openly as you do privately.

@Dydymoon

Considering you voted ~5 min after my vote to make sure it passes anyway, I doubt you’d support any PIP going against your plans.

Btw your proposal is also bypassing the governance framework because:

• Proposals shouldn’t be pushed to vote without at least trying to find a consensus
• Topics about funding (i.e budget for councilors) must be proposed on a PGM

So please, at least try to pretend you’re care about governance/community feedback and:

• Repost my comment even if you don’t like it
• Let the community discuss on such important topics without censoring
• Once done, repost your snapshot following the governance framework

Thank you.

Delusional 101 bubble popping:

• We need to have new signers for efficient ops (smaller MS will help too)
• We need to accelerate on decentralisation (you have offered 0 solution on this front)

Contrarily to your belief, there is consensus:

And if you feel we should pass a PGM for councilor funding, then sure, we will also do it. All in good time.

Few last words on the topic:

1. I am not your dog, if you can;t copy paste the comment in the appropriate thread then it doesn;t deserve to be posted.
2. You are not the community.
3. We are fully respecting the framework you are just trying to find excuses to push back a proposal, this is basic organisation disruption.

[Dydymoon]

@Figue

Once again, you are distorting the truth, we always stopped discussions on forums during a vote, this is a custom

Once again you’re accusing me of something you’re doing here.

Moreover, this kind of impulsive answer is not only going against the code of conduct you mentioned above, but it’s also showing you don’t actually verify before posting something.

Most of the forum posts topics are still open (as they should):

PIPs:

• 23 Voted - 20 Open - 3 Closed (Including 2 Controversial ones)
• 4 Pending - 4 Open
• 1 Denied or Canceled - 1 Open
• 1 Bypassed - 1 Closed

PGMs:

• 52 Voted - 48 Open - 4 Closed (Including 2 Controversial ones)
• 3 Pending - 3 Open
• 3 Denied or Canceled - 2 Open / 1 Deleted
• 1 Bypassed - 1 Closed

PIRs:

• 2 Voted - 1 Open - 1 Closed
• 1 Pending - 1 Open

PEPs:

• 1 Voted - 1 Open

That’s a weird definition of “always”. In fact you mainly closed the most controversial ones. Anyway thanks for demonstrating how unreliable your words can be sometimes.

The full detail is available here for anyone interested in verifying, forum admins can abuse their power to censor but luckily they shouldn’t be able to alterate dates even if trying to close it all now.

@Figue

If you feel we should add it into forum rules then sure, we can add them via a vote.

No I don’t think this should be added in the rules, I only request you to stop censoring & altering the governance forum please.

Community members should have the ability to access/comment previous proposals if needed, makes no sense to close it and even less to delete a comment going against your proposal during the vote.

@Figue

Glad to see you behave openly as you do privately.

What ? Are you upset I didn’t answer your msg justifying the censor by “I had to moderate the forum, here’s your reply, post it back elsewhere unrelated if you want” ?

Wondering what you expected me to say/react tbh

@Figue

Contrarily to your belief, there is consensus:

So let’s recap:

• You posted a PIP about redesigning governance, which received feedback to be updated so you turned the initial PIP into a “research post”, this one. (the poll you took as a screenshot is the one from the research post, not PIP-23)

• You reposted another proposal (PIP-23), which received less participation on the poll, as well as other feedback to update the proposal.

• Among the 8 votes on the PIP-23 poll are team members (4/6 votes for) while other votes were 1 rework & 1 abstain from two delegates. I don’t call this a consensus sorry.

• You answered aggressively to my first feedback asking more details, so I spent my morning to write an answer justifying my revote work

• You deleted my 2nd comment & sent it in my dm (instead of directly reposting it elsewhere if you really wanted to), closed the post so I couldn’t repost & voted 5 min after me to make sure it would be approved.

• Now you’re using the poll of another proposal to try justifying PIP-23 approval

& you’re the one accusing me of distorting the truth, insane.

The poll is quite reflective of the actual snapshot vote btw (67% of voters approving on poll are team members / 88% of the voting power approving PIP-23 are also team members)

@Figue

Few last words on the topic:

1. I am not your dog, if you can;t copy paste the comment in the appropriate thread then it doesn;t deserve to be posted.

2. You are not the community.

3. We are fully respecting the framework you are just trying to find excuses to push back a proposal, this is basic organisation disruption.

1. “I’m not your dog” is what you’d have got as an answer if I replied to your dm.

• If you really didn’t wanted to censor me, you would have at least reposted it directly so that people/delegates who didn’t voted yet can see my feedback & justification.

• It would have been faster for you to just copy/paste on the forum directly rather than copy & go to discord to send it in dm, especially as I have less available time lately so chances that I miss it before the end of the vote were high & you knew it.

• Finally I posted my reply in the appropriate thread as it was a feedback for the PIP-23, you just decided otherwise.

2. I’m one of the most active & valuable contributors even if you don’t like it, but if you continue to behave like this, I’ll stop at some point indeed (which seems to be your goal)

3. What you did on the last vote is extremely serious (details above) so I’m not trying to disrupt anything, just trying to do my delegate role correctly.

You have no excuses here & should be ashamed of your actions.

[Figue]

We’ve totally lost track with the actual discussion on governance redesign, which is the only thing that should matter in this thread. If you have a problem with other things, please open another thread.

Elections are up here if anyone wants to apply: https://gov.paladin.vote/t/pip-xx-councilor-election-s1-2024/