Sort:  

You are not getting it, are you?

The point was never about if she will get funded or not but rather about a collective failure to vote in another proposal which you are partaking in. Also about the fact that, if we wanted to, we could have gotten the same amount of work done for a lot less. Even though the DAO is currently overflowing with funds it doesn't mean that we shouldn't use it in a more efficient, self-sustaining way.

tenor.gif

Now go use that stake of yours for something collectively useful and vote for that other proposal or elaborate on why you won't.

It arguably brings a lot of value to the table which you would ultimately heftily benefit from. So is the case with Justine's proposal which is partially responsible for $hive's current valuation. Your stake appreciates in the end as a direct result. Disproportionally more than mine though yet here I am trying to convince you to do something mutually beneficial and consequently getting shafted on.

Isn't it ironic?

Why vote for one while not the other when the ultimate outcome is the same?

Are you tone-deaf?