From "the outside looking in" ...
"For one member to put out a proposal claiming its from the team, only to be contradicted by another speaks to a clear need for roles and responsibilities to be clarified. With the JUNO chain now having shown so much potential, and already having grown so much ..."
... this stands out to me @jk6276. Misrepresentation is just a fancy word for something worse ... It does not speak well for the "powers that be" behind JUNO.
No matter how this vote turns out, but especially if YES wins, I would be very surprised if the market doesn't "judge" it as unacceptable (or at least very uncomfortable) and the price tanks ...
Thanks for keeping us informed on it. Looking forward to the "post mortem!"
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
You are right, I have seen this happen before over the years, it will absolutely destroy the project if they steal the money from him.
Stating again I have "no dog in this fight" @jk6276, I have now read the latest message from this "whale." Successful in 5 industries over a long professional career, I am now retired. From that experience base, simply from reading what they have written, I personally think they have made a compelling argument in their defense.
In life, it is always good to "step back," as much as humanly possible, and do our best to try and "see" from the perspective of the other party. While it may not completely "close the gap" in perception, with good intentions it almost cannot fail to help ...
Key to their argument is blockchain technology provides a largely "open book" to prove or disprove claims. I am a strong advocate for being innocent until proven (beyond a shadow of a doubt!) guilty. And the "prosecutor" bears the burden of that effort ...
My input is the CORE-1 "mouth" that got all of this started (along with misrepresenting themselves ...) has a lot of work to do, to refute what this "whale" has stated in their defense ...
Ohh, wait a minute ... This is all going to be "over" in less than 24 hours ... Glad I am not invested in JUNO ...
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Vote ended up passing, with sufficient YES votes. Impressively, around 98% of tokens voted, an incredible turn out. So now the more detailed "Prop 17" is being much more carefully worded, and it will actually be the implementation of the wishes expressed with this vote. So likely to be another week of drama to come around this issue.
Slowly lightening my JUNO bags, wary of a community so willing to seize funds. I totally get that they should not have got the airdrop, but they did, and taking it off them months later seems wrong.
Anyway, it's an interesting case study into POS governance and it's practical implementation. Will be interesting to watch the long term impacts on the credibility of the project.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Thanks for the update.
No question!
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta