Dear @williamx
Please, compare your approach to this proposal and disposition to
to ours.
Changa Records makes a mistake in their proposal, ever so politely (as should be the case) you point it out - suggestively asking if it was a mistake. Result? [They corrected it.]
([APPROVED] Changa Records DAO September Funds - #6 by ChangaRecords)
The information they gave wasn’t clear to you, what did you do? You ask them to clarify, thus:
In response, they clarified and without much ado, 3 days after, their proposal was approved.
You didn’t say:
Instead you guided them to providing more suitable responses.
When I told you to treat our proposal the same way by asking for clarification whenever needed, what did you say?
You summarily, disrespectfully insisted that unlike Changa Records, we have to present perfect, specific information as part of our responsibility.
Although, according to you, our proposal didn’t have “enough information”, you somehow decided
[quote=“williamx, post:10, topic:28488”]
already understood what is being presented
[/quote].
This is the precise opposite of your response to Changa Records’ prosposal.
It bears repeating that the Forum is first and foremost for discussion, not for passing verdicts.
Without any hesitation, you insinuate that our proposals are
How do you justify this insulting comment?
@creativesdao-council
@williamx
Disclaimer:
Changa Records is doing fantastic work and I have no issues with them whatsoever.