赞楼主的道德洁癖。呵呵，人还是会忍不住想走捷径啊。
想起来我之前账号因为反对某项目而被封了，估计很大程度上也是基于某人的个人好恶。也挺失望的。
4 Likes
面目模糊的过程会玷污好的项目，不管最后赢还是输，我想所有人都应当要注意到这一点。
Never thought I would get this title. I will accept it with gratitude and see it as a symbol of responsibility.
At the same time, thank you for your contributions to CCC, and also thank everyone who is willing to contribute to CCC.
2 Likes
想起早年nervos招人，不差钱，重技术，讲情怀。
生存空间越来越逼仄，动作也就越来越容易变形，反推亦然。
3 Likes
我看出了 你在说什么，我很赞赏你的勇气和行为（因为稍微熟悉些的人 很容易看出你是谁），为你这次匿名发帖无声的反抗行为表示赞赏（真心）。有些人口口声声说要的公正，却在一直带着有色眼镜权衡着看东西，虽然可能目的达成了，但破坏了大家对“好”的共识，走向怎么利用规则去“拿”的想法的道路上
2 Likes
我不知道自己是对的还是错的，是公平的还是带着偏见的，而我相信我在评价的人也是如此，直到遇到和自己不同的意见开始思考。不同的背景产生不同的想法，这是必然的正常，也是投票机制存在的意义。
我直白表达我的观点，因为我不想当无事发生打官腔浪费大家的时间。我很高兴能听到其他人的想法，共识的形成需要每个人都发出自己的声音，我们在用观点为「元规则」投票。
哈哈，希望你能喜欢～
2 Likes
I don’t know what this is all about and I’m not sure I really want to know, because it doesn’t sound good…but I’m curious haha
But anyway, back to something CCC related.
Now the Rosen Bridge proposal has passed, are there plans to integrate Cardano and Ergo wallets with CCC?
That seems like it would be the real ‘selling point’ to get users from those chains to use CKB apps, because creating a new wallet, while pretty straightforward, is just too much hassle for most people, unless there’s a really high incentive.
3 Likes
I should be more direct. As you can see in that picture, someone boosted another person’s forum level from 0 to 3 for a proposal. Also, I’d like to point out my disappointment with using an organization’s name (more specifically, the foundation’s) to endorse a proposal.
I prefer not to name specific people or proposals to keep the discussion as neutral as possible.
Sounds interesting, and you can create an issue on the repo for that. I won’t say there is such a plan, but that’s definitely worth doing. (PRs are welcome!)
Exactly, especially when they have to manage multiple wallets across chains. Allowing them to use the same wallet before & after bridging sounds attractive.
2 Likes
这是刚在隔壁市场部办公室喊着“集市”论，转头到财务部办公室就举起了“大教堂”大棒 
Could you clarify who you’re referring to? Your self-censored screenshot gives the impression that I influenced a proposal vote, as @Thinker’s comment shows. I didn’t do that.
伙计们，看看ckb怎么发展吧，少折腾这些有的没的，肚量大一些，别那么矫情
2 Likes
I’m assuming we’re talking about either Phroi’s or Sonami’s level here?
I’m not even sure how this could or would influence anyone’s vote. I wasn’t even aware of any levels until @zz_tovarishch ‘s tool made them visible.
I fully understand why Jan needs to defend himself here if this is implying it’s about him, but a big public disagreement between 2 very well respected members probably isn’t what we need at the moment.
2 Likes
我和你有相同的感觉，应该说的就是 rosen-bridge提案吧，发起提案的新账号没权限，有某位管理把账户权限直接从0提到3了？我的视角看到的是这个：https://x.com/realsixfig/status/2011866854273192157
5 Likes
Me neither.
Thank you.
2 Likes
Not Jan.
I prefer not to. I don’t think revealing who did this would do any good, except create an enemy for people. If anyone else needs such a target, you can assume it was me instead of making wild guesses and spreading rumours.
我们可以听听其他人有什么感觉。
Maybe part of this won’t affect you; maybe all of this won’t affect you. I’m a much more paranoid person, so I decide based on all the information I can get.
3 Likes
AFAIK nope, I’m already every day here, probably I already got every badge by now, no need to boosting me 
TBH I really don’t care about that stuff so long I’m able to communicate properly on this platform.
Looking at Sonami’s badges, you’ll notice: Regular which has been Granted. This badge has been granted 11 times in total.
Exactly, I had this very same issue back when I tried to create my first thread in 2022: [Looking for feedback] iCKB: a tokenization of NervosDAO deposits
I was not able to create it cause my account was too new back then, so @jm9k (who was a moderator) granted me that permission to work around it and the rest is history.
I didn’t know about this, but I wouldn’t be too surprised if that was what happened. I lost one good hour last night trying to figure it out what happened, I even looked thru all moderators actions in the last month! (The Granted action didn’t appear tho, so more transparency there could be nice)
Sonami account represents the company we formed to accelerate CKB adoption. The account was created at the last second to not disclose information before the proposal was ready (hence this issue, I guess). Just keep in mind both @jm9k and me have enough reputation both on & off Nervos Talk to create that proposal, so yeah…
It’s fine, no worries, lately I got pretty paranoid too after Community DAO v1.1 events.
Feel free to call out people more 
Phroi
3 Likes
Ok, this make sense.
I couldn’t work out what these levels mean or where they are even visible to anyone, but it seems like it’s the Regular badge that just gives you the right to change topic names etc and was probably (hopefully) just given to Sonami for that reason.
I don’t know, it’s impossible for us to know if there was other motives behind it, so I think the benefit of the doubt needs to be given this time that there was nothing ‘dodgy’ going on, but I understand now @6aea8a80d7fe ‘s reasons for being concerned so I’m glad they called this out.
1 Like
I noticed a newly created account (this one) can’t post with links/images. I browsed the forum for ten minutes, then I upgraded to level 1, which is enough for me to do everything. I understand that we don’t need to waste these ten minutes, but granting level 1 would be more appropriate than level 3.
There are two things happening here:
- Rank promotion that is not publicly disclosed. This will likely have little impact, but it’s a bad thing because it means someone is abusing their power to change the rules of the community. Even if they weren’t malicious, they should have thought twice before doing it. If you look at the people who receive the Regular badge, this isn’t even the first time.
- Using the Foundation’s name to support a proposal is a much worse thing. I don’t object to anyone supporting a proposal based on their own stance, not even Jan (he didn’t, in case anyone is misled by that).
But it shouldn’t be done in the name of an organization. This has a negative impact on subsequent proposals. Do I need to actively seek the Foundation’s support to pass a proposal? Does having the Foundation’s support guarantee a proposal’s passage? Can I use underhanded methods to incite others to vote for/against (this is a bit of an exaggeration, but I don’t think it’s impossible, or even that it has already happened)?
I have no interest in finding someone who made a mistake here, nor do I think it makes any sense. I just want to remind everyone to think about how much these “identities” influence voting, whether positively or negatively.
I wrote several thousand characters about CCC plus a 5% complaint, but most people were more interested in the complaint. Sure enough, nobody wants to read the changelog, right? riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight?
3 Likes
Where?
If the Foundation was sponsoring Rosen Bridge, they would have paid it out via grants as any other Infra project… They didn’t
Maybe @janx can split topics, I really like CCC development direction
2 Likes
Expressing his personal opinion