Remember that Chaos DAO is the group that spent $30k on beer. They can’t be taken seriously.
Maybe we should create our own DAO.
That’s sadly true and I hope @batbayar is gonna doing something to correct this.
@BizaRre At this point he should create a new referendum, give it a more detailed title and the old one rename it as “ERROR, VOTE NAY”.
Adding the info that is missing won’t help since the referendum had a bad start and few of those that already nayed won’t return back to correct their vote. It is better to start with a new referendum explaining everything in detail.
@BizaRre you asked me to do something to correct this, so here is the straight answer, including the parts where the criticism is fair.
The full text of the referendum is on-chain. All of it: the remark’s first line is the title, “Wish for Change: settle DAO releases of JAM state footprint in DOT”, and every section you and Kingston reviewed sits in the preimage. The filed text has also been sitting in this thread as post 20 since July 16, thirteen days before I filed, with the review in the open the whole time.
What a tally page shows is the renderer’s choice, plus whatever the author maintains there. On 1927’s page the full remark text renders under the Call tab, straight from the chain. What stays empty is the headline, which shows the generic “[Wish For Change] Referendum #1927”, and the context pane, which says “No context provided”. Both are off-chain fields. The page even names who can fill the context pane: the filing account, behind a login. Max maintains his page by hand, he said as much in this thread; I don’t log in there. If the headline should pick up the remark’s first line on its own, the place to ask is the renderer. That is fixable on their side, and it costs them less than it costs every author to work around it.
What I will not do is log in to a website to patch a display field. The referendum is the on-chain object. A title typed into a site’s database is not part of it, it only looks like it is. Governance that needs a web2 login to be complete has it backwards, and I would rather not set that precedent for whoever files next. I came here to work on the part that still stands when no one maintains a website, and that is where I intend to stay.
The fair part of the criticism: the first thing a visitor meets is a placeholder headline and a box that says “No context provided”, and the actual text sits further down under a tab called Call. That is a bad first impression. The remark could also have carried more of its own context; that lesson is mine as much as anyone’s. Nothing on-chain can be edited after the fact, that is the point of the thing, so the correction lands in how these get written next time. If this question comes back to the chain, I am glad to help write that version, and if a co-author wants to file it and keep the web2 side current from day one, even better. It does not have to come from my account.
On the tally itself there is nothing to correct. The vote is what it is.
@batbayar If you don’t care enough to present your referendum orderly why should other people care enough to Aye it? If they don’t see effort from your part then they think it is not worthwhile so they Nay it.
If your idea has a value you should present it orderly like the other proposals. The other proposal is winning with most Ayes because it presented it orderly and explained it well. Yours is just a title without a description.
I kindly ask @Max to share what he and HIC are gonna do about this. Maybe it would be better to modify ref. #1926, merging #1927 into it.
5,797.30 Euros*
Fuck ChaosDAO.
You can find our comment on the ref here: Free Beer Stand & BD/Networking Space at Polkadot Decoded
You can find a tweet about this here: ChaosDAO ☯️ on X: "Why did ChaosDAO do this? 😩 We have published the final report for @Polkadot referendum #821. Out of the 4,504 DOT awarded we have returned 3,454.61 DOT to the treasury ✅ See the report (including detailed budget breakdown): https://t.co/oqPI2YsElP https://t.co/c5HdudjGkS" / X
You can read the report here: ChaosDAO Beer Stand Report
That was an insult to the community, and at that moment, you lost all credibility and trust.
If that is the case, then I wonder what happens to your credibility and trust for blatantly lying on here.
Look forward to more cope.
Best of luck.
Don’t you dare call me a liar. You scammer, you only returned the money because the community forced you to.
I understand that you have extremely poor reading comprehension.
Returning the funds was always in the referendum.
Above is an image from the ref itself.
Here’s a comment from someone who is confirming as such.
It is quite funny to see how mad you are getting when your obvious falsehood gets pointed out, keep it up, it’s making my morning.
Cheers fella.
Note to all: Before this thread gets any more heated, please remember our guidelines.
Keep discussions civil with your emotions at the door. See the other side of the discussion before you reply, comment or post. Whilst some are strict in their opinion, we simply ask that you see both side of the coin.
Okay, but I’m not going to allow him to disrespect me.
Honesty is such a lonely word, everyone is so untrue… 
They are off topic 
ChaosDAO, why the Nay?