We should all agree to refrain from such attacks.
I’m not sure what your problem is but at this point you’re not only unhelpful, but flat out detrimental to the goal of constructive discussion. Please resign from posting here
@matt.bit ban him quickly！
Okay, Okay. We look down upon the foundation, we look down upon the community. Okay? Who is the foundation? who is the community?
You guys are so strong. Your values are outstanding — “$165000 per notebook”. You have helped Nervos withstand the selling pressure “Spend lots of money buy 200K CKB”. Okay. Whatever.
So, just give you a word in Chinese, “司马昭之心，路人皆知。”
Guys let’s be civil
We have a community telegram chat if you’d care to join
We aren’t trying to be strong. We just have convictions. It is my conviction that Shannon wasn’t co-operative
However people can change. She’s always welcome back with a better attitude
I said loud and clear. Considering your support for Tanner’s proposal, I don’t think your understanding can represent mine. Your consensus is not my consensus.
Your values are completely different from mine.I am a retail investor, and I need to be responsible for my investments and protect my own interests.
Moreover, my experience tells me that someone who habitually makes mistakes will not change.
I’m sorry we couldn’t find common ground here. I will keep trying. Nervos is open and decentralized we can agree to disagree and still have shared values through the protocol. I’m sorry things got out of hand.
Who specifically does ‘foundation’ refer to here? Please explain it to me very clearly. I really want to hear specific names from you.
Thank you so much.
Yeah you’re right. I undermined my own point there. I wish we had all handled this differently before it devolved to this extent
it was rhetorical question. But I’m specifically referring to the legal entities that make up foundation & the other companies in charge of building the core protocol & the people in their employ
Your understanding ability is so strong, and your book is so expensive. Even the book’s catalog number is written incorrectly, it should be 37,500,000 CKB. With such an impressive book, who in the foundation gave you the courage to ask for so much money?
topic closed, take it up in Telegram
I have opened the topic to add updates:
- This proposal is currently being voted on, so please cast your valuable vote whether you are in favor or against. Voting link: [VOT] CKB Community DAO Proposal
- 这份提案目前正在投票中，无论你是赞成还是反对，都请投下你的宝贵票数。投票链接：[VOT] CKB Community DAO Proposal
- According to the newly updated rules,
Proposals with budgets exceeding $10,000 will be divided into multiple stages or timeframes for payment disbursement. The initial funding will be limited to 20% of the budget, with a maximum cap of $10,000.
the initial funding for this proposal will be:
8,000,000 CKB x 20% = 1,600,000 CKB（20% of the total budget $25k / 8,000,000 CKB）
The initial funding (1,600,000 CKB) for this proposal has been paid. (tx hash).
Subsequent payments (the remaining 80% of the total budget, which is 6,400,000 CKB) will be determined based on specific milestones or goals. So, it is recommended that the proposer clearly outline the estimated timeline, costs, and deliverables for each stage, with evaluations and confirmations conducted at the end of each stage.
预算超过 $10,000 的提案将被分为多个阶段或时间段进行支付。其中，启动资金拨款的上限为预算的 20% 且不得超过 $10,000。
8,000,000 CKB x 20% = 1,600,000 CKB（总预算 $25k / 8,000,000 CKB 的 20%）
后续的支付金额（即剩下的 80%，总共 6,400,000 CKB）将依据特定的里程碑或达成的目标来确定。这些里程碑和目标，建议提案者明确列出，包括每个阶段的预计时间、费用和成果等信息，并在每个阶段结束时进行评估和确认。
刚得知 William 称自己身体抱恙，无法完成提案里写的事情，所以返还了 1,477,398 CKB (92.3%) 到 DAO 的多签地址上。
希望 William 早日恢复健康，也希望大家每天都健健康康的！
William said he is ill and unable to execute the tasks outlined in the proposal, so he has returned 1,477,398 CKB (92.3%) to the multi-signature address of DAO.
Hope William recovers soon, and I wish good health for everyone at all times.
Hope William recovers soon
That’s a shame as this proposal was really good and reasonably priced