Parity's position on forum moderation

[pierreaubert]

I dont want to feed the troll but look at the pattern below:

@TheIonian

2. @pierreaubert given your statement on the PSA thread, specifically

We as moderators do not have the bandwidth to verify veracity of posts nor do we have any sort of robust “community note” mechanism implement yet and therefore will be removing all posts which fall into this category wholesale.

I do not think that’s from me. Can you correct the post please?

@salty_carbonara

@pierreaubert I know you have access to CD, I just performed a search of messages your Parity employees/forum mods left there. I strongly suggest you do the same, before going deeper on “unlimited support” for your employees. I find your courage admirable, but once you see what is there, you will see you are standing up for morally questionable people.

Another incorrect statement: i do not know who is in ChaosDAO and I don’t have access to their chat. If you are wondering, I am not a member. I looked up Decentralized Voices Program – ChaosDAO and they claim 340 members which means some are likely working at Parity.

@salty_carbonara

@pierreaubert you said you have nothing to do with OpenGov and that I should address my concerns to W3F - if this is true, why have you gave blessing to your employees to lock the forum?

that’s not what I said. I explained that DV is not run by Parity and that on topics related to DV you should talk to W3F.

Also untrue, I didn’t give a blessing. We are a relatively large company where people are fairly autonomous and can take decisions good or bad by themselves.

@salty_carbonara

@pierreaubert can Parity either disclose all employees that are also members of CD or propose a ban on joining closed DAOs, or any other mechanic that prevents conflict of interest.

I don’t believe I can force people to disclose if they are part of ChaosDAO or not. In preventing conflict of interest I am interested in improving things and not only at Parity.

@salty_carbonara

If W3F or Parity fails to recognise this pattern and further pretends the open financial questions are irrelevant,

Speaking for Parity, that’s another untruth. Am sure @Bill will tell the same for the foundation.

If you all want to have a proper discussion, please check your facts.