It’s been good, but after 3 months as the Bot Operator for @ssg-community it is time for me (BuggedOut) to move on and give somebody else a turn as I have some real life stuff to take care of from July onward. As per our Governance Framework which was outlined when @ssg-community was created, there is enough flexibility for a transition of this community asset to occur via a Proposal For Change. See Governance item iii)
iii) A Proposal For Change is formally drawn up by the Community Bot Operator who Posts it on the STEEM platform and it is voted on voluntarily by Community Members
So the first part of the Proposal For Change is that 2 of our long standing and committed members @silverstackeruk and @welshstacker take on the role of Bot Operators and have the Master Key for the @ssg-community account passed on to them, as per Governance item vii)
viii) Community Members may decide to change Community Bot Operator via Petition For Change and the Master Key for the Community Bot Account will be transferred to the new Community Bot Operator
In addition, these two members have requested that a 50% discount be applied to their Contribution Tier each month to help compensate for the additional workload required to operate the @ssg-community account. This can be made possible via approval of a Contingency Expense as outlined in Governance item vii)
vii) All proceeds from Author Rewards, Curation Rewards, Membership Contributions or Powered Down STEEM are returned to the Community Members via purchase of a Delegation Lease to boost Community Bot Upvote value unless an explicit contingency expense has been approved via a formal Membership Vote
So in summary this Proposal For Change contains 2 parts which are to be voted on together :-
1. The new Bot Operators for @ssg-community will be @welshstacker and @silverstackeruk and the Master Key of @ssg-community is to be passed to them
2. A Contingency Expense taking the form of a 50% discount to Contribution Tiers for @welshstacker and @silverstackeruk is to be added to the ongoing budget for @ssg-community
There will be 2 comments below this post which will be a simple “YES – I support this Proposal For Change” and “NO – I reject this Proposal For Change” and we ask you, the members of the #SteemSilverGold community to place a nominal vote on one of these comments to indicate your preference. Voting will be open for 72 hours (3 days) from the posting of this Proposal For Change.
As the incumbent Bot Operator I would encourage members to support this Proposal For Change. These two guys have been involved with @ssg-community from the start and they have proven they care about the long term future of the #SteemSilverGold membership and it’s upvote service. You would struggle to find more dedicated members than these 2 guys.
YES – I support this Proposal For Change
YES - I support this Proposal for Change
yes, I support the proposal for transfer.
Thanks for your hard work my friend. You need to create time for your personal affairs as well. You have been great thus far my friend
Thanks @BuggedOut for the work. These two guys are good dudes. Thumbs Up!
“YES – I support this Proposal For Change”
So glad you have found succesors. YES. Thx again and see you.
I fully support this proposal for change. Thanks for your dedicated work and excellent stewardship of Precious.
Cheers! from @thedamus
Yes I'm cool with the change, all good people involved
Just chuck a tiny vote on the comment above for "YES – I support this Proposal For Change" to make sure your vote gets counted.
@buggedout - did your receive any discount for the bot membership during your operational control?
No I haven't, but I do think the discount requested is reasonable compensation considering the work that is required to operate @ssg-community
I don't doubt that is fair compensation, but if fair is fair, then perhaps we should send @buggedout a small going away present? Maybe consider it "payment" in arrears?
⬆️What @nofiat said. Buggs you've been a blessing and a god send. Thanks for all the time and effort, you will be missed
To be clear, I have no issues with the proposal for change and vote yes!
Thanks. I appreciate the thought, but it really is not necessary.
I agree 100%! These guys are two great choices.
YES – I support this Proposal For Change
Just chuck a tiny vote on the comment above for "YES – I support this Proposal For Change" to make sure your vote gets counted.
done
NO – I reject this Proposal For Change
Sorry... I'm a Rebel... I have nothing against "change"... It's not easy going against the grain, but I think the #steemsilvergold Community Members should be given more of an opportunity to nominate the next Bot Operator... The way it's being done here doesn't seem fair... I feel we should have more of a Community Selection... This is all happening way too fast... I realize it's not easy to vote no, but I think there has to be a better way to pass on the Master Key... And no, I don't want the job... I'm wondering why we would need two instead of one... A 50% discount in Tier Contributions seems to be fair for one person... This is all happening too fast... I think we should first submit Nominations, to find out who might be interested, then vote to narrow it down to the top two, then let us all Vote on One Person out of the top two, to become the Bot Operator... Note... I have nothing against these two people being considered... But let's be fair and see if we have more options... If you already voted Yes and want to change your vote, feel free to up-vote this comment... If you can, just submit a .01 percent up-vote... I'm not looking for money here...
Both @silverstackeruk and myself put the call out several days ago and so I think there has been plenty of opportunity for someone actively involved in the community (activity which I think is essential to taking on the job) to express an interest in running the bot.
Keep in mind the governance on @ssg-community effectively sets up a perpetual and directly democratic process which is very agile, so if another member wants to Petition For Change they are free to do so tommorrow. It's not like we're voting for the US President here where you get 1 vote and are then stuck for 4 years for another opportunity to have a say. So if you find someone "worthy and willing" then put them forward and use the governance framework provided. It is there to serve the members.
Finally, if it wasn't for @ssg-community I would have already taken my break from STEEM. I explicitly have delayed my plans by 2 weeks to facilitate a smooth handover, so not only do I think a long beurocratic process is unneccessary and redundant here - but I think it is also a bit unfair, even disrespectful of the time I've volunteered to date.
Considering the current vote count I think it's pretty safe to say we've got this right, but we will wait out the 3 day voting window before anything is formalised.
That was a very nice reply... As you can see, I'm the lone voice of the group... It's all good... I think I was just a born rebel... I figured no one wanted to be the first to say no... From the looks of it, everyone is happy with your choices...
Who would you nominate then ?
I'm always searching for the right thing to do, but I have no one in mind at the moment... Others may know of someone worthy and willing... I just feel we need input from as many Members as possible...
YES- I support the proposal for change
I thought ssuk already had control?
ssuk only has the posting key currently.
Ah thank you for the clarification. I'm good with the change fyi. Welshy and ssuk are good dudes.
You can write many beautifully. All of your writings and information are very much like. You can go ahead in this way.Thank you
YES – I support this Proposal For Change
Yes - to the proposal
Yes-I support the proposal for change!
@buggedout I support the proposal for contingency expense but am not sure about the bot operators. Shouldn't a bot operator needs to be technically qualified to tweak the bot code if needed? I don't know about SSU & Welshie's competency in flawlessly operating the bot. So I'd leave the community to decide on it.
So is there a provision for partial voting? Like I want to vote on Proposal-2 but don't want to cast my vote (either in favour or against) on Proposal-1
Wow... I guess I must be the bad guy... lol... I'm standing at the door knocking... The Present bears witness of the Past, and the Future "shall" make all things Clear...
I vote for this change for BOT operator @ssg-community