New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Agenda: Governance, Jan 29 2019 #46

lehnberg opened this Issue Jan 20, 2019 · 6 comments


None yet
5 participants
Copy link

lehnberg commented Jan 20, 2019

Solicit suggestions for agenda items for the Governance meeting to be held on Tuesday Jan 29 @ 15:00 UTC in Gitter main lobby. Please comment to provide topics or suggestions.

Proposed agenda

  1. Agenda review
  2. Action point follow ups from previous meeting
    1. Decision making process documented?
    2. Decision log: Implemented?
    3. @yeastplume has added status section to end of each point of libsecp audit?
    4. @lehnberg has created request for proposal for how to handle promotion of other projects?
    5. New website design merged?
    6. Grin stack exchange created?
    7. Communities wiki page created?
    8. Events wiki page created?
  3. PoW
    1. Ethical ASIC mining policy.
  4. Security reviews / audits
  5. Dev fund
    1. Fund spending transparency report
    2. Donation addresses
  6. Promotion of other projects
  7. Exchange integrations
  8. Website: Content
  9. Risk mgmt brainstorm
  10. Other questions

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

0xb100d commented Jan 26, 2019

re: 8 website content, we definitely should have a motion to remove the discord chat from the main page. I can't believe it was added to begin with. I saw the discord referenced as an official channel elsewhere online, and an opinion therein touted as official, and this is extremely problematic for obvious reasons.

I just realized that my pull request indicating this change is redundant as it has already been PR'd, but it is unresolved. My sincerity and passion to fix this I hope is proved by my willingness to have my own mostly-unofficial twitter removed as well if that's what it takes. as much as I appreciate it being listed on the main page, if it is going to come down to a discussion of fairness I would much rather have the grinmw twitter listed on a separate community page rather than allow any other channels with less oversight be erroneously indicated as official. I DO think it is useful to have some channels listed upfront, and that the gitter and keybase are the only ones that probably are narrow enough to qualify as official, so at the very least a link to a page that lists channels (and ideally ranks them in some way) should still be on the main grin site.

re 6: promotion of other projects
it is going to become messy quickly if every project that donates gets listed. maybe we should have an early contributor section that lists people/companies that donated before mainnet launch, as they deserve the kudos, and they more or less get to stay forever. then we could have another section that requires semi-regular contributions to remain there. and finally a third section that showcases projects that core members deeply appreciate, things like vault73 or grinmint (assuming they have also donated). this could coincide with a page of recommended projects that have proven their aligned interest and dedication to grin (whether or not they have donated). if we have a document listing contributors on the git, then even if companies lapse in their donation, they still have bragging rights in the form of historical proof they donated and when they did.

re 9: if the core devs start getting poached to work for deep pocketed companies we will have blockstream-type conspiracy theories and I don't know if there's any way to mitigate this.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

kargakis commented Jan 26, 2019

An ethical mining policy mandated by the devs/council has bee requested in the forum, may be worth discussing.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

lehnberg commented Jan 26, 2019

re: 8 website content, we definitely should have a motion to remove the discord chat from the main page.

This has already been discussed (but not yet implemented, PRs are welcome):

An ethical mining policy mandated by the devs/council

Added to the agenda.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

crazymonkyyy commented Jan 29, 2019

In light of me giving up on affecting the mission statement; I would like to get a few(3 ish) devs who is more extremest then others to help pen a political document with their names on it, in the hopes in makes a "charleston fence" with the coming rapid growth we all know is coming with the watering down of the culture that brings.

rough ideas for this

  1. promoting soft-agorism(buying at the farmers market, paying odd jobs under the table, owning cypto) as a value in itself

  2. A moral defence of hard-agorism(cough starting a stateless currency cough, hosting 3d printed gun blueprints, dodging taxes) WITH WARNINGS to do so sanely; like copying satoshi and being anonymous

  3. a mention of an-cap

  4. Pointing out that bitcoin wasn't first and this maybe an "eye of the storm"; and we return to the norm of "liberty dollar"

  5. an unambiguous call for hard-privacy, that won't be confused with "I'm going to be mildly angry if facebook sells my medical data" soft-privacy.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

sesam commented Jan 30, 2019

crazy? maybe, maybe not. For the sake of the not anonymous people and businesses, may I suggest doing the less normie/conformant/legal side of grin similar to an anonymous group or guild? I'm thinking Copimism, SamouraiWallet, DarkWallet pre rebranding. And make it open invitation that works also for users coming in via tor. About being anonymous...oops, brb :) No honestly most current grinners likely don't time to rebel (much). Teenage-mutant-grin-heroes? Adoption usually starts with the young with little to lose and a beef with the status quo


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

crazymonkyyy commented Jan 30, 2019

You can suggest it; but... how should I put this... you misunderstand your audience by a large degree; you would get further quoting the bible story about the atheist to modern atheists. or the tone deaf christian films for that matter.

Mildly inconvenience to you is so low on my list of concerns.

Effectively you just stated the alternative attitude that I wish to fight , which I understand is the standard, but should be fairly clear, I, don't, care and without making a magic argument that somehow I've never heard before attacking my priors, I will continue not caring into the future

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment