#256 "1 != 19"
đ€Ą Not much to review here actually, consider this "troll proposal" to not take very serious or personal. After a couple of months, It's becoming a fun habit to explore new ways to draw the attention of council members to leave some feedback in our Kreivo common good parachain proposal. As last week's click bait in the direction channel didn't prove very effective this time I bring you all 1 != 19.
This call sets the council collective to 1 member, the one and only Raul! đ
This extrinsic might not even work as expected(never tried this before) and I imagine the elections pallet might override this setting, but in case people want to see what kind of chaos it unfolds if it passes, go ahead and support it!(some people just what to see the world burn đŠčđ).
Is this a joke? sure, you can also take it as a friendly criticism about the perceived lack of involvement of many council members with the community matters, something that might become irrelevant in the near future with Governance v2(will it?đ€).
Happy week everyone!
Show More
Overall 66 % of users are feeling neutral. The text discusses concerns about a referendum on Kreivo's proposal potentially causing chaos and delaying future referenda. The author acknowledges their role as an ambassador interested in improving community governance, but also admits to being a technical person who enjoys challenging tasks. They express concern over the councilors' busy schedules and question whether everyone is always this occupied. The text ends with suggestions for delegating responsibilities within the community and hopes for effective leadership that prioritizes community needs....
Overall 33 % of users are feeling against it. The councillors' delayed review of the proposal may not be due to its content but rather their busy schedules and impending tasks like Decoded and deployments. The proposal might also increase the workload for governance bodies, making it less appealing.
AI-generated from comments
Honestly, I dont think this is the way to bring attention to your proposal - councillors are delayed in reviewing your proposal because 1. a common good chain proposal is not something to discuss in a week, 2. we re all busy with different tasks (especially given Decoded is coming and we re approach xcmp deployment, gov2 deployment, etc), 3. in the end with this proposal you add more work to the governance bodies.
I agree this isn't the smartest way to bring attention to Kreivo's proposal, if anything I'm likely shooting myself in the foot by potentially delaying future referenda, but before the builder of Virto I'm an ambassador interested in discussing and finding ways the system's governance can become more effective for the community, and before all that I'm a simple technical guy who often goes the hard way to follow a conviction or the simple fun of it, specially when allowed to by a forgiving environment like Kusama â€ïž
I apologize to those in the council like you that take the time to review proposals and that I'll be wasting their time with this extra overhead, it's understandable that councilors have a busy schedule but it also raises some questions. Should everybody be this busy ... like all the time?(e.g. Kreivo looking for at least a thumbs up/down for more than two monthsđ„ș) Busyness seems to be the actual problem, there's a particularly big council with 19 seats but with the effectiveness of a few, dare I speculate, maybe it's because most leaders in this community are busy with projects of their own that take most of their time and there's little time left to community matters that are often overestimated, from what I can observe it's quite a busy job that could use some more full-time hands on it, but current reality is that most people have businesses to attend.
But anyway, all is going to be solved by Gov2 right? hopefully! But I also fear it might not be the case, these are just words of hope that we will find good ways to bring the needed leaders that will go up the đ„ sensei ladder and will have not only the skills but time and disposition to attend the community needs and be compensated for their professional work instead of ending up with a popularity contest where only the ones with more followers but not necessarily the most helpful will raise.
I really mean no harm and hope the best for our community, but of all the chains out there if there's one that should be ready to be stressed tested the most that is KusamađŠ if that extra testing ends up consuming governance resources that are critical(e.g. a shared Raul that Polkadot needs full time and free of trolling) perhaps it's worth discussing if the two networks should share so much(e.g. how good is it to be under the same Polkadot fellowship).
Surprised it made it into a referendum. Expect chaos!
Good day dear, reading your comments, I consider "Delegate" as a solution, hold a meeting (at the levels that you know from your experience) where current tasks are reviewed, define which can be delegated (by category of responsibility) vs category of commitment of the people who have been helping and make up the community. In conclusion, to give much more structure to the strategic vision of growth that has been taking place, in the chat of candidates for ambassadors (telegram) under the direction of Albert (Spain) there are 57 people, without counting the rest of the countries. I know that there are repetitive tasks, of various levels of criticality and impact that can be reviewed and delegated, and as they mesh and pick up pace, we will have the Ecosystem that we all dream of.
Discover similar proposals
