Hello everyone, my name is Giotto De Filippi and most of you probably already heard of me from Twitter
I apologize for the lack of structure of this post but I have a disability which makes it extremely hard for me to type so I have to use voice recognition which is highly ineffective and so the message may not be as ideally formatted and structured as I wish
My belief is that polkadot has the best product but has not yet succeeded in transforming the product into a business. I believe in polkadot because I believe it is easier to transform a good product into a business than to sustain a business with a bad product
I am a highly pragmatic person and my only concern is effectiveness an impact
There is no specific philosophy or orientation except the success of polkadot implemented in the most effective and impactful way
In principle I am against the idea of DV because I believe it should be people with skin in the game that vote but as they say if you cannot fight them join them
I will not go much into my background because I don’t think it’s relevant, as they say you’re only as good as your last trade (or your last action). But just for everyone to know my background is actually legal even if I used to be a developer in the early days mostly self-taught
I was doing marketing for Skype in the early days, invested in crypto in the early days and then I also invested in several companies later (AI and blockchain)
I do not always agree with you, but who actually agrees with someone percent of the time?
You have pushed Polkadot forward & truthfully, I wouldn’t have been this active if it weren’t for avenues you opened & created. I do believe in level playing field’s. I do believe you have good intentions that help facilitate many successes for Polkadot.
The same people that will be against you most likely will be against me. My view of DV by W3F was an attempt to balance the voting dynamic after what we experienced the first half of OpenGov. You in a way was king maker on a lot of early proposals. The community pushed back very hard. Now we are at a point where we have DV grants.
I personally like you… I like everyone. I’m Dotsama. You often produce very thought-provoking conversations like Open EVM, Polkadots inflation, The circle of competence spaces etc… You played a key role in early OpenGov and even in my own position as (I guess) a Polkadot ecosystem agent.
I respect you, but I don’t think you should receive a DV because you already hold significant voting power and what most people don’t talk about (Influence via X) which can be as powerful as voting power itself.
Granting you a DV could make the balance of power uneven again.
I do think this round of DVs should be granted to people that express a fluid thought process. People that won’t Nay every proposal because it’s associated with Giotto. People that won’t Aye every proposal because “Polkadot needs marketing”. We need fluid thinking Dvs that hold strong morals.
It is indeed everyone’s right to apply, and the decision ultimately rests with W3F, who will carefully assess the applications and determine the recipients of their proxies.
Well, “not being given a DV delegation” is in no way shape or form a “punishment.”
More importantly, while I’m neither supporting nor opposing your DV candidacy with this message, I have to admit that your candidacy is at least buttressed by very real ongoing dedication to OpenGov as a voter, a delegate, proponent, decision depositor, and commentator, and that can’t be said about many other DV applicants. On the other hand, of course, there is the question of whether it’s in the ecosystem’s best interest to augment your already-massive OpenGov voting power, but that’s not a question for me to answer, mercifully.
The process with DED has shown that you care more about your own interests than the well-being of the ecosystem. (This is perhaps even understandable to a certain extent, although you will have cut yourself in the flesh.) In my understanding DV probably has the purpose of improving the balance of power and trust in OpenGov. Your membership would be contrary to this.
A delegation in Kusama would be interesting as a way to show your commitment is with the ecosystem and not with your DOT. Supporting projects and driving developments in the sister chain is a great way to ultimately benefit Polkadot where all your experimental ideas can be tried out without so much backlash.
No doubt Giotto has shown that he is a supporter of Polkadot and wants its development in every direction in order to improve the ecosystem.
One can have mixed oppinions about his ideas, but there is no doubt that he has raised the level of participation in DAO. He brought ideas and pushed all people to get involved and improve their presence within the ecosystem.
Regarding Gov he has always been active, has always delved into every aspect of the proposals, and importantly has been proactive in proposing solutions and honest in criticism.
You undoubtedly deserve a place in the DV, and it would be even more justified given that no one likely shares your unique vision. This is crucial for maintaining balance among all the DVs involved.
You previously offered to vote trade with ChaosDAO (which I informed you was not possible or feasible). How can we be assured you will cease that if you receive DV?
Regarding Glove that’s all on-chain, I’m not going to dig up all the receipts right now, others can. You’ve been against Ivy and were against Glove and stated as much.
percent of the time?
