thank u so much @ChrawnnaCorp!
5 Likes
Only âSpace Monkeysâ episodes are given back for info.
Letâs not waste more time for the remaining part, itâs gonna be obsolete pretty quickly and doesnât worth it.
I invite everyone to switch rapidly to more useful topics, including Kusamaâs tokenomics for instance.
Energy should be redirected to more productive matters for the network now.
3 Likes
Letâs be clear about this.
You created The Kus, and you â and only you â are the one who opened it.
That means you are also the only one who can close it.
You opened it, you close it.
Donât deflect responsibility or blame others.
Just a second angle on the argument I am trying to expose here (I see many) 
Under the new CLARITY Act, to qualify as âDigital Commodityâ, a blockchain must be certified as a âMature Blockchainâ, defined as a system that is ânot controlled by any person or group of persons under common control.â
The new Clarity Act distinguishes between âRestricted digital Assetâ (SEC jurisdiction) and âDigital Commodityâ (CFTC jurisdiction). Even if the protocol advances into Digital Commodity status, then it faces CFTCâs aggressive stance on Market Manipulation.
Reason: The CFTC treats âartificial price settingâ as manipulation.
I suppose nobody here argues against Polkadotâs classification as âDigital Commodityâ, following the new CLARITY Act rules.
AND, I will suppose nobody here cares about the main argument @ChrawnnaCorp exposes: liability.
Other than @Max :
A content producer MUST always check if their information is liable, otherwise rectify.
@ChrawnnaCorp is rectifying.
.
Hi Jay,
I appreciate you taking the time to explain everything in a video with such clarity. We understand that some things didnât turn out as we expected, but as you mentioned, it wasnât a total failure. I really admire the work you do with the Polkadot ecosystem, and itâs something worthy of applause.
We hope everything works out well with W3F, since The Kus is the most important outlet for sharing Polkadot updates and high-quality interviews. As I mentioned, I admire your work, and you are one of the few people who truly do a good job.
If you decide to continue, you will keep having my support in promoting it on Polkadot MĂ©xicoâs social networks. I saw your work at Sub0 in Argentina, and thatâs why I admire you for the great job you do.
I apologize if I offended you on the forum when you made the channel private.
This is my opinion, in case someone from the W3F leadership is reading (haha). Some products have worked well on Polkadot and other projects, but most have failed. Only a few have been successful. In a cryptocurrency market where capital is at risk, it is crucial to evolve quickly and create products that adapt to usersâ needs. Blockchains like Solana and Sui are gaining ground because they create user-friendly applications with good usability.
In my experience, I went to Argentina for the Sub0 event, my first official Polkadot event. A friend from Ethereum recommended using Peanut to make USDC payments on the Arbitrum network via Mercado Pago for merchants. Imagine if the Polkadot App theyâve been announcing for more than two years had actually existed, or if there was something similar on Polkadot using the AssetHub network with USDC. To this day, there is nothing like that.
If the W3F wants Polkadot to stand out among the competition, we need good products, as the new website says: âProducts for People.â However, results are slow to arrive, and other blockchains are gaining ground. We have great technology, as has been demonstrated over the last decade with all the implementations and updates. But if we donât create good products to attract users to the network, the small Polkadot community will continue to fade away little by little. As Richard Stallman mentions, a project depends on its community.
We need good products with minimal friction and easy usability for daily and professional life, not just promises in the air. When I started with Polkadot, I was impressed with all the technology offered and how it was better than Ethereum. We know that, but honestly, we need W3F to act decisively if we want to carry forward Polkadotâs vision. Otherwise, we will keep losing important people in the ecosystem. Sometimes, it is beneficial to collaborate with other blockchains instead of isolating ourselves. This is crucial because it can deter experienced dapp users from joining Polkadot due to its closed nature. If Polkadot truly wants to interconnect all blockchains, we should see more direct collaborations with Solana, Sui, Ethereum, and others.
This is my perspective as a user, and I believe many community members share it. Iâve attended other events, such as Suiâs in Buenos Aires, where a presenter was giving away tokens using the gift method by scanning a QR code shown live on the screen. This encouraged audience interaction during the talk. The presenter gave away $50 and then asked attendees to send $10 back to his address on screen, and so on. This type of community interaction provides live experiences of how to transact with wallets. If the Web3 Foundation (W3F) listens to the community and understands what we really want, we will continue to support Polkadot. We need products that are easy, simple, and collaborative with other ecosystems, instead of isolating ourselves within the same network.
3 Likes
Hola @w3nerick Erick,
Liability en español se traduce como responsabilidad, y @ChrawnnaCorp se refiere a la responsabilidad legal.
1 Like
gracias @labormedia a la vez estoy algo triste y estoy mejorando mi inglés poco a poco, disculpa.
1 Like
@w3nerick Espero te sientas mejor. Yo estaba triste ayer, pero hoy se me pasó. Hay un gran desafio por delante, y mi intención es bajar en razón después de los años de hype.
No hay nada que disculpar, sĂłlo mucho que aclarar para el nuevo sentido de nuestros destinos.
Un saludo fraterno.
1 Like
This is sarcasm. Iâm still waiting to see all the content made public again, besides the Space Monkeysâ episodes by The Kusamarian.
There shouldnât be any ambiguity here: all content must be publicly available, as it was funded by the Polkadot Treasury.
When a significant portion of treasury-funded content remains private and inaccessible to the wider community, it reflects a complete lack of professionalism.
3 Likes
I am IMPRESSED the person that has been a main voice holder for this experiment all these years gets finally treated this way WITHOUT addressing the main reason he is addressing.
@guido are you an active member of the ecosystem ? I ask because I was expelled from the PBA community, hence here I talk from my own interest on free markets and decentralized systems.
You might disagree with @ChrawnnaCorp , but with this move he is showing how well he knows the media business. He was probably the best asset on media management you could have for this ânew money experimentsâ. Nothing else to say about this.
Coming back to the main exposed reason of this topic, I feel the need to repeat it to you three times:
Liability, Liability, Liability.
If people keeps insisting in not addressing arguments, I will repeat it in capital letters until this thread gets closed.
1 Like
Iâm not here to defend anyone or to point any fingers, but I find it incredibly ironic that a community championing decentralization and trustlessness as aspects of its core identity is now facing crisis because of⊠centralization. Funding is a two way street and surely if centralization was an actual concern of anyone, this could have been addressed literally years ago. We could have a decentralized archive of every artifact, but instead the treasury funded a centralized service and let it operate as such. The community voters could have stipulated (and enforced) this desire; everything could have been decentralized and immutable from the beginning. IPFS is not new. Crust exists. PNS is underway. This content is not private. Clearly the pathways exist and so, to me, the fact that this community ever allowed this in the first place is⊠troubling to say the least, and shines a light on the true intentions of voters.
I would argue there is a certain community-wide technical negligence here, or rather, it was completely ignored. Itâs absolutely exhausting to watch the treasury lambast tech teams for perceived incompetence while millions are poured into centralized marketing that can be turned off with a click. The Kus is one example, but definitely not a culprit imo. If I asked an intermiami fan about Polkadot theyâd have no idea wtf Iâm talking about. Thatâs an absolute failure and it should be criticized and investigated deeply.
Speaking from personal experience: Iâve been called a grifter for wanting to be paid for actual work already delivered (note to all: devs cannot work for free and itâs an absolute insult to expect this; fixed price contracts are a very very very (very?) bad idea and they are proven to lead to enhanced failure modes). AAG was the best outlets we had to meaningfully spread messaging. Here we are treating the loss of some YouTubeâą videos (that I doubt anybody has real intentions to consume) as some kind of fundamental crisis, meanwhile dev teams are leaving en-masse. Best of luck to you all, this has been far too much for me.
8 Likes
of course - I have been deeply involved in the Polkadot ecosystem since 2019.
I see, reasons I see manyâŠ
l i a b i l i t y
Since i know Kusama and Polkadot since 2021,Treasuries always helpe to launch real nice projects/products and not give them life funding coming just and only from one source input. Web3 is so much than that.
Imagine a universe and constelations, this is web3 !
A common place, with common people and common Tech.
I dont see web 3 parity polkadot kusama as bosses of notning instead i see them and us as the infrastructural layer for generations to come. Co creating a better world.
2 Likes
I would like to start by acknowledging that The Kus was definitely a key source of information since I first arrived to the ecosystem 1 year ago. The content helped me learn quickly about Polkadot history and the Space Monkeys interviews also introduced me to many profiles of ecosystem members. After a couple of months I started participating in the panel of AAG Kusama and Polkadot and later AAG in Spanish. Like many other members of the community, we always participated on a volunteer basis and gave our opinions, points of view and contributed to the discussion according to our own profile. I am thankful to Jay and his team for creating these open spaces for governance discussion, for the content they produced as well as everything I learned in our weekly conversations over the past few months, online and IRL.
Unfortunately, what has happened over the past few weeks has been disappointing to me. Yes, there have been many changes, including the state of OpenGov, the W3Fâs decision to start voting, and I have been vocal about this in the past on AAG and other Twitter spaces. Regardless, this is part of the game, and yes many projects and programs (including DV and DN) have been discontinued or their funding has not been renewed, letâs be clear, The Kus is just one more who has faced this sudden news in December.
I believe everyone is free to react however they wish, but a decision and a personâs actions also have consequences. In my opinion, shutting down KusDAO, removing the onchain identities, stopping all content suddenly and removing the content from YouTube and Twitter was rather drastic. But it is a choice that Jay made. This sends a message to the community, I personally hear that message as: if there is no further treasury funding via OpenGov or the Marketing Bounty (now closed) or the W3F there will be no more Kus content. I hear a unilateral decision, I do not hear: letâs consult with the community and find a path forward or letâs find a way to make The Kus generate its own revenue or letâs reform or reduce the content until a better solution can be found.
I was probably naĂŻve to think that the entire team of The Kus would still be a part of the community even if their project was not funded, I naĂŻvely expected them to participate, even if in a different capacity or in a reduced amount of time, not to cut everything and disconnect. But as I said, it is a choice, one that shows, in my eyes, the level of commitment to the community, to the project and to the vision. Everyone is free to act and make their own decisions, the consequences of their legacy, their reputation and their perceived image will be a consequence of those actions.
I agree with others above, I think we have spent enough time and energy on this discussion. For those of us who are here for the longterm, who believe in this project and want to be useful and productive, keep building a better world, letâs focus on what matters, stay true to our cypherpunk values and keep going. Yes, this transition period brings a lot of uncertainty, but we will navigate it and the future is full of opportunities, we each have to find our own, to each person their choice of which path to follow.
11 Likes
I wanted to stay out of this shit show, but since you mentioned OpenGov.Watch in your monologue I will reply:
It is a lie that OpenGov.Watch has âdeclared in private circles that you was going to be brought downâ. Our contract with the W3F scopes exactly one job and that is to help OpenGov grow up.
Growing up can be a painful process. We have to learn not to destroy our toys when we are not allowed to play with them anymore. We have to learn that we cannot hurt other people just because we donât like their opinion. We have to learn that lying doesnât work out for long before people catch up to it. We have to learn to deal with our frustrations and setbacks and not let our anger out on everybody else.
These are hard lessons to learn and not everybody manages to do so.
You showed your true face to me 1.5 years ago, so learning that you took all the channels down as some weird form of revenge or negotiation leverage was not shocking to me, but still a surprise how little control you have over your impulses.
Sadly it is a visible pattern that everytime you are in trouble you are trying to drag someone else down. Brad, Adam, rich, flez. Anybody who critizizes you will get attacked. At one point I suggested to you via DM that you should have said an unimportant thing a little differently and you started subtweeting me a full week. You clearly have issues with responding to criticism and attacks and your only solution is to violently and ruthlessly character-assasinate the attacker.
And now this pattern is getting you trapped, because the W3F decided to not vote for your proposal, you felt attacked and went into autopilot when Karam had to bring you the message. You tried to drag him down and get him tainted. But that obviously didnât work because as you had to admit to yourself he was just the messenger.
And so now you tried to make everybody mad at the W3F by shutting down your channels and telling everyone itâs the W3Fs fault that you hit the âprivateâ button. But that is obviously also not working. What do now? There is no real straw to grab, so you make it an aggregate conspiracy of the W3F, flez, OpenGov.Watch.
But your problem is and always was that you canât do that shit to me because I stand up for myself. So just leave it. This whole spectable is already undignified enough.
Grow up and walk away in dignity.
17 Likes
I would not pretend W3F/Parity/the other side is a good bird here. Just weeks ago they were still siding with Jay with all those moderation censorship and their leadership calling others jerks. Outside of W3F/Parity, I even saw on Twitter someone directly called flez a âuseful idiotâ. You guys sided with Jay, by allowing this bullying to happen. W3F/Parity allowed this blatant abuse with their inaction and moderation censorship.
Now all those come back to bite you. Whoâs the real âjerkâ and âuseful idiotâ here? I hope you also realize how many new enemies you have made for Polkadot in this process, just because you refused to properly uphold the Code of Conduct and allowed this bullying.
If you are a big organization, inaction and bad decision is already evil, because there are many others (investors and such) who depend on you.
This is not the first time W3F/Parityâs bad decisions hurt us deeply. Recall the Polkadot Hub / EVM delay? When I pointed out the issue in May, the leadership responded by firing me a week later, only to realize two months later that I was right and forced to pivot. We see a similar pattern here. The W3F/Parity organizational decision making process never improves. This is why we are here today.
4 Likes
Polkadot could become the basis for an entire new era of internet. There is more potential with this technology than any other project in the crypto space. However, time and time again the community reduces itself to a laughing stock with OpenGov related nonsense. Its embarrassing.
Bad actors that create public spectacles because they have been defunded need to be dealt with. The Kus should not receive any additional funding in the future in light of recent actions.
Simultaneously, W3F needs to do a better job of managing their community, addressing issues, and mitigating risks of events like these that affect Polkadotâs reputation.
We just spent $2.25 million for content that a creator was allowed to withhold from the community. These proposals need to be vetted more clearly from actual authority figures. We cannot allow community members to just vote on things blindly because things like marketing might make the price go up. The OpenGov process needs to be improved.
The decision making is an absolute joke - I fully agree!!!