Committee Town Halls (Poll)

[puppies]

I an not opposed to a mumble hangout but, I have been incredibly busy.  Anyone that feels my lack of communication with the community at large is an issue, is free to withdraw their vote. 

As long as I am a committee member, I will make the decisions that I feel are best for bitshares.  I feel like that is the job that I don't get paid for, and don't even really want. My disdain for politics should be widely known.

While the feedback from the small number of vocal users on this forum, or that would attend a mumble is incredibly useful in forming an opinion we all need to remember.  This forum does not speak for bitshares.  Mumble does not speak for bitshares.  Bytemaster does not speak for bitshares.  Bitshares speaks for itself.  Isn't that the whole point?  The votes we receive, or do not receive speak louder than anything else.  Once again, feel free to remove your vote if you disagree. 

With that said.  Fuzzy, I could make myself available to answer any questions in a mumble session Thursday or Friday.    Assuming that I haven't been voted out in the mean time.  Let me know what time, and I'll schedule around it.  I can only speak for myself though.  I'd like to stay away from hearsay regarding other committee members.

[fuzzy]

Here is a nice little link that started me realizing something might be wrong: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20470.0.html

I am alerted and to be honest since I and apparently most the entire community were left out of these private discussions, it is pretty difficult to know the truth just from forum posts.  Committee members should be striving to be BETTER leaders than Bytemaster, so why so secretive in their meetings?

Again, what secretive in meetings are you talking about?

Please, read the link yourself provided. Read it. I am afraid You really missunderstood what xeroc is saying in that post.

I have (though I'm pretty sure you haven't check the link and are talking about the other link I could have provided).  However, it seems there has been one heck of a disagreement that the community was not let in on in any meaningful way.  That is all I can know...that and that of course not a single committee member responded to my request to begin this push toward using a format that has been proven necessary for "rule by the people".  And this is despite my outreach and the community's willingness to tell you guys what they want.

I am not putting all committee members down here.  Just sad that this has been handled so poorly considering Bytemaster and I have shown you guys working templates on how to do this.  Perhaps BM recognized this and made an executive decision that as long as the committee is unable to bring the broader community onboard that it wasn't quite ready for primetime...however, I cannot speak for bm and this is only speculation.

[fuzzy]

[fuzzy]

Just wanting to update the community that the committee members that I reached out to the committee members currently in place approximately 1 week ago telling them of the substantial backing by the community for open town halls to keep the process of finalizing decisions open and transparent to shareholders. 

As you can see in this poll the community wants it.  Yet noone has reached out to me yet.  Unfortunately, however, I have heard of a private channel where they discuss the decisions without input from the community.  This is VERY DANGEROUS. 

BitShares has been kept alive because of BM's total conviction to trying to be as transparent as possible.  TRUST is priceless.  If outsiders begin seeing a secretive group of committee members who do not prescribe to a similar level of integrity...what are they going to think the future of bitshares will be? 

Just so everyone knows...the committee members have been made aware of my willingness to volunteer to bring these meetings together and Not a Single One has contacted me.

I think you just had bad luck on the timing fuzzy!

Basically just when you tried to reach us out, the bytemaster's voting thing happened.
All the committee was voted out and replaced by the inits.
Now seems that bytemaster added in his slate some "old" committee too, but I think that there is not a lot of confidence and certainty about who will effectively be in the committee since bitshares came back to a sort of one-man-decides. I preferred to see the community and proxies voting for the committee members and not the committee placed on by bm votes.

Anyway, I did not contact you back just because I am not longer a committee member.

About the private channel thing: I don't really know how/why some people seem to put a lot of energy in throwing sh*t on the committee.
There is a chat on telegram, as well as there is another one for the witnesses.
This does not mean we decide/decided anything without listening the community. Actually is the opposite since every proposals we did, started from input we gathered from community discussions on the forum.
Plus, in that chat there are not only committee members, but rather community members that could express a valid and important pov from the community itself.

The only Dangerous things are false facts spread as if they were holy truths.

The problem is the platform(s) chosen and a lack of communication.  There is a reason governance structures include other forms of media besides things like telegram and forums where it would require so much effort and constant monitoring just to keep in the loop, when it would be far more efficient to have town halls similar to what we currently do with BM.  And just so you know, I don't care if you use Mumble or not--and I don't even own the Beyond Bitcoin site, so I am not personally getting anything from advocating for it other than a good bit of extra unpaid work and the knowledge that our committee members are willing to be open and transparent in a way our community has grown accustomed to applying its own version of self-governance.  We need an easy way to put the spotlight on committee members in a way that makes them KNOW they are being watched.  This is also the reason why committee members should either be A) Blockchain team leaders for various Graphene based chains, or B) paid for their work...because it is going to be one hell of a stressful job (and it should be to make sure these people do not get bought out and turned against bitshares). 

These things I am saying are not half truths.  If there are other communication channels, why was I not informed of them?  Why were others not?  Why did the entire committee seem to ignore me?  You gave me your reason...what about the others? 

Committee members should be servants to the chain, but should be rewarded at a later date for their work (if they accomplish it without scandal). 

Just ask yourself if all this would be in the same place had the Committee listened to the community's answers to this poll that I posted nearly a month ago.  Because I can pretty much assure you if we had been doing Town Halls, most everyone would have been informed---and also able to get on and give you guys their concerns publically in a way that is highly visible to the community.  So why choose avenues that are easily obscured?  Also, where is the post that tells everyone to join this telegram group so they can keep up to date to the text conversations? 

*Note* Telegram ends up as a wall of text where information is very easily lost, so please take into account that it easily obscures what is going on.  If I do not log into telegram for a day I might join up tomorrow to see 1200 posts

*addition*  And why leave me out of the loop considering these ideas are actually mine?  Do I have to also run for a dang committee position to be taken seriously on this issue?

[Bhuz]

Here is a nice little link that started me realizing something might be wrong: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20470.0.html

I am alerted and to be honest since I and apparently most the entire community were left out of these private discussions, it is pretty difficult to know the truth just from forum posts.  Committee members should be striving to be BETTER leaders than Bytemaster, so why so secretive in their meetings?

Again, what secretive in meetings are you talking about?

Please, read the link yourself provided. Read it. I am afraid You really missunderstood what xeroc is saying in that post.

[Bhuz]

Just wanting to update the community that the committee members that I reached out to the committee members currently in place approximately 1 week ago telling them of the substantial backing by the community for open town halls to keep the process of finalizing decisions open and transparent to shareholders. 

As you can see in this poll the community wants it.  Yet noone has reached out to me yet.  Unfortunately, however, I have heard of a private channel where they discuss the decisions without input from the community.  This is VERY DANGEROUS. 

BitShares has been kept alive because of BM's total conviction to trying to be as transparent as possible.  TRUST is priceless.  If outsiders begin seeing a secretive group of committee members who do not prescribe to a similar level of integrity...what are they going to think the future of bitshares will be? 

Just so everyone knows...the committee members have been made aware of my willingness to volunteer to bring these meetings together and Not a Single One has contacted me.

I think you just had bad luck on the timing fuzzy!

Basically just when you tried to reach us out, the bytemaster's voting thing happened.
All the committee was voted out and replaced by the inits.
Now seems that bytemaster added in his slate some "old" committee too, but I think that there is not a lot of confidence and certainty about who will effectively be in the committee since bitshares came back to a sort of one-man-decides. I preferred to see the community and proxies voting for the committee members and not the committee placed on by bm votes.

Anyway, I did not contact you back just because I am not longer a committee member.

About the private channel thing: I don't really know how/why some people seem to put a lot of energy in throwing sh*t on the committee.
There is a chat on telegram, as well as there is another one for the witnesses.
This does not mean we decide/decided anything without listening the community. Actually is the opposite since every proposals we did, started from input we gathered from community discussions on the forum.
Plus, in that chat there are not only committee members, but rather community members that could express a valid and important pov from the community itself.

The only Dangerous things are false facts spread as if they were holy truths.

[fuzzy]

Here is a nice little link that started me realizing something might be wrong: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20470.0.html

I am alerted and to be honest since I and apparently most the entire community were left out of these private discussions, it is pretty difficult to know the truth just from forum posts.  Committee members should be striving to be BETTER leaders than Bytemaster, so why so secretive in their meetings? 

@fav apparently even left this group of secretive bitshares rulers...so until someone gives me a damn good reason to believe otherwise, I am going to thank him for his integrity and am going to advocate he consider running the Committee Town Halls in a manner similar to what we have all been used to.  We have to more than anything reward those who prove they are trustworthy...and this to me is probably the best way.

[lil_jay890]

that's why we need a chatbox in the forums

There is a chatbox in the forum that no one ever uses... I think the importance of having one is being grossly overstated.

[fuzzy]

that's why we need a chatbox in the forums

We have one already.  This should go to show you how effective it is.  Is there a reason none of the committee members want to do mumble town halls?  The model that has worked so well and actually proven itself over the past 2 years and given our chain a standard of transparency and trust that has been to this point in time among the most commendable in the world?

It was intentionally built and structured so you could have a voice...like pretty much everything I do for this community. 

[Akado]

that's why we need a chatbox in the forums

[fuzzy]

Just wanting to update the community that the committee members that I reached out to the committee members currently in place approximately 1 week ago telling them of the substantial backing by the community for open town halls to keep the process of finalizing decisions open and transparent to shareholders. 

As you can see in this poll the community wants it.  Yet noone has reached out to me yet.  Unfortunately, however, I have heard of a private channel where they discuss the decisions without input from the community.  This is VERY DANGEROUS. 

BitShares has been kept alive because of BM's total conviction to trying to be as transparent as possible.  TRUST is priceless.  If outsiders begin seeing a secretive group of committee members who do not prescribe to a similar level of integrity...what are they going to think the future of bitshares will be? 

Just so everyone knows...the committee members have been made aware of my willingness to volunteer to bring these meetings together and Not a Single One has contacted me. 

[fuzzy]

Posting this to remind people my intention to accomplish this. 

It is obvious the community wants it...so if you are a committee member please reach out to me and we can find a way to have this.  I will be handing out tokens to those in attendance. 

These could be Brownies, my own token, or potentially even sponsor tokens...etc. 

[fuzzy]

Imo the show should be divided in a few subjects per minutes. Assuming it lasts 2 hours so we could make up all of this, I would divide it in

10m for Dan's Updates on 2.0, bug fix, features implemented, etc keeping it short
50m for Dan to answer questions from the community

This sums up 1hour. Hangouts take longer but I guess we sometimes get lost in discussion.

30m for projects/businesses give their updates and talk about what they are building, keeping it short.
30m for committee members to analyse worker proposals and discuss their views about them.

2h sounds like a bit much but sometimes we won't have all business or projects creators to speak about them, same thing for committee members, etc. It's a matter of the host, Fuzzy atm, to keep people in check with time. That way we can talk about all of that per in a mumble session, keep it organized and give plenty of updates on the current situation

I definitely would like to have it after bms hangout.  However, i also dont want to constrain time too much because sometimes during the early stages of development we need to not cut a "runover hangout" off early. 

[Akado]

Imo the show should be divided in a few subjects per minutes. Assuming it lasts 2 hours so we could make up all of this, I would divide it in

10m for Dan's Updates on 2.0, bug fix, features implemented, etc keeping it short
50m for Dan to answer questions from the community

This sums up 1hour. Hangouts take longer but I guess we sometimes get lost in discussion.

30m for projects/businesses give their updates and talk about what they are building, keeping it short.
30m for committee members to analyse worker proposals and discuss their views about them.

2h sounds like a bit much but sometimes we won't have all business or projects creators to speak about them, same thing for committee members, etc. It's a matter of the host, Fuzzy atm, to keep people in check with time. That way we can talk about all of that per in a mumble session, keep it organized and give plenty of updates on the current situation

[fuzzy]

ok!
things are starting to get to the point where it is blatantly obvious we should do this.

However, I want to see if we can keep getting votes from the community.