This one yes-or-no question seems to bundle many other questions together in a way that seems a bit unfair to anyone who would answer those questions differently from one another. Those questions include, but are not limited to:
- Should HiveFest happen?
- Should ChainCulture happen?
- Should HiveFest and/or ChainCulture rely on DHF funding?
- Should whatever event take place, should it be focused inward upon the community, outward as a Hive-sponsored networking/outreach operation, or both?
- Do you already have the trip booked? :)
I have my own feelings about each of these, and they do not coalesce into an answer I'm comfortable giving as an unqualified yes/no answer to the specific question asked.
TL;DR: I would vote in support of the proposal, which I believe is the only proper and fair way to settle your question. (but really, this is probably the longest-bodied comment operation I've signed in several years; please do read it)
Before I go on, let me first address the ChainCulture/outreach question separately.
Perhaps complicating this point is my somewhat unpopular, yet unwavering, opinion that "Hive is OK". I have this opinion because, frankly, my ideas about Hive conflict with many of the most popular ideas about what it should be and how it should perform. As I tell everyone who will listen, I see HIVE, the token, as something much closer to real estate than money, or more intimately, I treat what I have of it as I would treat my "forever home": if it's sold someday, it'll probably be after I'm dead. That is to say, I'm not overly concerned with its market value. I have grown rather weary of watching people I like say mean things about other people I like because of arguments about DHF allocation, the rewards pool, and other sources of inflation.
The core business proposition of ChainCulture is, of course, growth. The prevailing philosophy everywhere I look is that we must grow; we must network; we must proselytise and, at the end of the day, the most important measure of Hive's success is its token price. I do not share this philosophy and never have. Now, I would be happy to see Hive become more valuable. I would be happy if more people join, if more products are built on top of it, and so on... I'm all for connecting and learning and growing (yes, even pricewise, in due time). So I do not dislike the ChainCulture concept at all, but I really dislike that it has become the focus of an existential question about HiveFest.
All that being said, I really, really want HiveFest to happen. It's an event with great personal significance to me. Aside from affording me the yearly opportunity to meet with a group of people who have grown important to me, those who know, know why it's so special ;)
I'm not going to sit here and try to make a case that the DHF should fund HiveFest, though. Would I vote for the proposal if it makes HiveFest happen? Absolutely! "But Lem," one might ask, "isn't that just like answering 'yes'?" Not at all!
I'm aware that a lot of people are heavily invested in Hive not just emotionally, but materially and financially, all at a significant opportunity cost. I believe those people have earned their stake and, therefore, their right to vote on DHF funding. If a DHF proposal achieves funding, it is because our consensus mechanism has weighed everyone's stake and determined that it is the proper thing to do as a result. Therefore, I feel no shame throwing my tiny stake in the ring, because if it's funded, I'll only be personally responsible for my stake's share of the allocation, which would be comically minuscule.
In this comment section, on the other hand, I feel that answering "yes" to the question asked ("Should Hive fund HiveFest XI and ChainCulture this year") would express an affirmative stance that yes, those who have much more stake than I do, many of whom may not even attend the event, should be expected to effectively bankroll a whole outreach event with four-part harmony, which they may or may not believe in, simply because I want to continue a tradition and meet up with friends. That would be incredibly self-absorbed of me, wouldn't it? However, I would personally be disappointed if a decision to cancel HiveFest due to insufficient funding were based on a vibe check, and not the cryptographically-proven consensus mechanism our chain has for this express purpose.
First off, thank you for the very very very extensive response :)
I did indeed bundle several questions into one, and you're right that the only binding way to settle this is the proposal itself, the stake-weighted vote, not a comment-section vibe check, but it really help feels the current state of feels.
The post was never meant to replace it actually, but it is an onchain way of collecting opinions and learning from it. If the room here were overwhelmingly "don't even bother," I'd save everyone the proposal. It isn't, it's mixed and thoughtful, so the proposal is likely where it actually gets decided, exactly as you say.