Thanks much, Blaze. Looking forward to getting to know you!
2 Likes
Yes, sorry the proper reply did not go through. Please continue and help us shape the governance forum around this initiative.
Hi all!
@blaze @Dacha
Looking at your stormy discussion and promotion of your candidate, I come to the idea that you have become bored.The ecosystem has DAO and consuls with the right to vote, a forum for transparency and discussion, a white newspaper and etiquette to comply with the rules.Does the community have a problem to resort to such changes with the election of the president? Co-founders are striving for decentralization and WEB 3.0, and you are trying to centralize the community with your candidate. Your example may be reflected in other projects and Near channels, where they will also begin to choose the main person who will dictate their rules and help those who voted for him. After the elections, the opposition may appear.At the moment, some members of the community are crossing the acceptable limits of etiquette. You sow enmity between the participants and split the unity. Be wiser.
Thx 
3 Likes
You hit my point already.
With the whole voting on Discord and or forum, I suggest this voting be taken to AstroDAO and then we can have real voting without exchange of words.
@blaze, since you have been handling this, I think it could be a great idea.
1 Like
You can not have a “fair/real” voting system unless private voting is available. Last I checked, all votes on AstroDAO are public and susceptible to payouts, blackmail, and other forms of corruption. But I do agree that discord, telegram, and forums are just as bad.
As others have said, it is simply too early to have these high stake votes, and one should adjust the wording and goals of a vote/poll to reflect this; a way to get a feel of what the community thinks, nothing more.
But I’m just a random forum troll, so feel free to ignore me and follow those looking for power, riches, and fame err; I mean to lead you into a better world by paving the road with the best of intentions.
1 Like
You are right with this.
…and I was just suggesting an Astro as an option.
This isn’t necessary tbh. Everyone wants to contribute to the ecosystem in an area they feel is right and best fit for their capabilities. This is so because they want things to be handles in the right way.
If you see it as being power drunk, that’s your view and I can’t tag you to be wrong.
Above all, we all build the NEAR ecosystem together.
Thanks, thanks
Once again, thanks for taking the time to explain in detail, to anonymous accounts on the forum who seem determined to do little to no research and then dump all their questions here from their superior moral ground.
Few things I find noteworthy from this thread so far:
- Active community members posting well thought out and detailed reasons on why they support this proposal
- Anonymous accounts posting poorly drafted, short and seemingly passionate responses in opposition without any substance
- The only other proposed candidate - Dacha - is not actually contesting the position and we have agreed that both Blaze and Dacha should collaborate in the best way they see possible to ensure this initiative is a success.
While I am a big proponent of anonymity, particularly in instances when you may want to speak truth to power and fear there may be negative repercussions against you. However, it has to be said that most ‘anonymous’ players on the governance forum have a very simplistic, chaotic agenda (Forum admins can see your IP addresses, among other things…)
Of course I support on-chain voting, but we also have to be pragmatic as to the infrastructure we have available now and the timeline for the changes.
9 Likes
I vouch for @blaze .
Maybe he is not that active on forums, or chats, but he is definitely at the core of the NEAR ecosystem and with a full heart providing support and dedicated to the growth of the ecosystem. He has great ideas and plans and working hard with various core protocols. Not talking… working hard.
I wish you the best @blaze , and please don’t look at some of the trolling messages here. Be above that.
5 Likes
I’m 1000% for @blaze.
He work with all the ecosystem of NEAR blockchain since many years. I worked with him, he can definitively be the NDC President.
He lead OpenShardAlliance, take part in Onboarding new validators on mainnet, now working on StakeWars, etc.
He is good in communication, technical knowledge, i’m sure he can take the lead on this main subject which is NDC !
5 Likes
I vote 100% for @blaze, since the mainnet release he has been a great community leader and validator support. I don’t see the best candidate out there. Good luck Henry.
4 Likes
Hey @blaze , thank for your awesome proposal.
I am also one of the few people that can recognise your amazing works that you has done to NEAR nor its Ecosystem so far and we as Community are extremely greatful for it.
However, yet with this NDC still in a drafting phase and voting the President of it still too early to decide since you know, The president will have the bigger weight into where this Initiative heading to.
Let’s do more consideration, more brainstorm, more of actual campaigns to promote yourself/your works to the widen community and then after that, I do believe the community can understand your works and totally support you like I did today.
Anyways, please don’t take any trolls nor negative comments in here as personal attacks. On the contrary, take those criticism feedbacks, learn and overcome them then show true leadership that a president should have.
Much love and respect.
Bailey12
6 Likes
@zavodil @frol - Thank you for your valid points, along with several other community members stating the vote is premature. I agree with this. However, let me give some reasoning for adding the vote.
This was the second call given by Illia for the community to step forward and organize this initiative. The first call to action was over a year ago and went unanswered. His direct statement on the first call with the signers of the “call for participation” was, “You are the community!” This was a direct call to assemble, organize, and drive this initiative. That call to action, along with feedback on who posted the “call for participation,” caused me to step forward and begin to organize the initiative.
I also felt a self-nomination was not good enough, so I decided to take my candidacy on the forum after some initial feedback from @Dacha on the Discord server about transparency.
So the vote here was to gain consensus around if I have the support of the community to be interim President, and it appears I do.
I am happy to remove the vote, or we can let this post serve as a clear indicator that this does not elect me as president but is a vote from the community that I am a proven and potential candidate. I am also happy to update the title.
I certainly hope more qualified individuals than I will step forward to accept the call and that we can have debates and see the fulfillment of the proper process that the community desires.
- Yes, remove the Vote and Update Title?
- No, it’s an indicator of your candidacy
0 voters
2 Likes
The presidency and all other NDC positions are unpaid volunteer work. It’s unreasonable to expect high caliber people to drop their sources of income. We will have conflicts of interest, they are a real concern. On chain transparency can help us find a new way to address it.
Going on chain for this vote isn’t going to help with it’s legitimacy. Until we have a voting tool which integrates KYC we can’t have good faith in the voters, on or off chain. Take the recent Women in Web3 Changemakers vote where nothing was at stake.
We are moving from a benevolent plutocracy (NF) to something which hasn’t been well defined (NDC). Without voting mechanisms, I propose the following pragmatic solution for this first phase:
-
The community nominates heads/councils of each seat (including self elections).
-
NF interviews the candidates and assigns the roles.
-
Constitution team drafts an article guiding future governance
-
Technical team proposes a solution for KYC’d on chain voting
This approach isn’t perfect but it’s immediately feasible. Gradual decentralization works better than immediate full decentralization.
14 Likes
You are just fudding, it’s not bots voting.
This was the second call given by Illia for the community to step forward and organize this initiative. The first call to action was over a year ago and went unanswered. His direct statement on the first call with the signers of the “call for participation” was, “You are the community!” This was a direct call to assemble, organize, and drive this initiative. That call to action, along with feedback on who posted the “call for participation,” caused me to step forward and begin to organize the initiative.
This is totally fair. I am thankful to all the people who care and step in, and without such people, we cannot move forward with this paradigm.
I am happy to remove the vote, or we can let this post serve as a clear indicator that this does not elect me as president but is a vote from the community that I am a proven and potential candidate. I am also happy to update the title.
This sounds like the most transparent solution to me. As @starpause said:
The presidency and all other NDC positions are unpaid volunteer work. It’s unreasonable to expect high caliber people to drop their sources of income.
We cannot expect to have a line of volunteers for the roles. Also, it indicates the lack of incentivization in NDC model. NDC is still vaguely defined and it is not even clear what are the power and responsibilities for each role in the NDC model.
Just to state it clearly, I completely support the idea of forming the bootstrapping teams and working from there. In that case, I clearly see @blaze as a perfect candidate to lead it.
8 Likes
I support @blaze on this initiative. There will not be a perfect candidate, for me there are 3 main things to look for in the person who will be doing this type of work.
- Experience in cross collaboration in the NEAR ecosystem.
- Transparency in his work.
- Commitment to follow through on the projects.
I know first hand what @blaze has done for the ecosystem and expecting little in return.
My 2cents on compensation for NDC roles, they should be paid for their time and commitment to make it work. Put together a list of milestones and payments to be done as they deliver each individual contributions.
These are roles that require focus and commitment to deliver, which is a full time job. We cannot expect people to work for free. Also there will be a lot of pressure and stress on the roles required to kick off NDC, so motivation needs to be high and not having pressure to bring food to the table is a plus to the team delivering a high stakes venture.
Wishing the best of luck to the candidates.
5 Likes
Concur with all your points, Claudio.
Blaze is an OG community member, more than likely outdates the vast majority of members here in this thread (not calling you old, Blaze 
!)
Full support.
8 Likes
Good to see you stand up to this position and I believe the NEAR community would do Justice to this.