Yes, I believe that’s the original spirit of Tezos – voting on technical amendments to avoid forks like in Bitcoin or Ethereum. If Tezos becomes more “social” in its evolution, that’s okay, but I think there should be a technical proposal and voting process before implementing such changes (not necessarily positive).
Regarding social and community issues, I think there are already institutions like the Tezos Foundation and Tezos Commons (community program, community DAO) to address those. Especially, the Tezos Foundation still has ample funds for various projects, so if they choose not to fund Tezos Africa, it’s likely not due to a lack of funds.
In any case, I will vote “Nay” on this matter. Both positions (mine and yours) have been clearly expressed, and there isn’t much more to argue about.
Sure. Start a topic on how to evolve the proposal process so that amendments can go through a process unique to it, before competing with the stock proposal. It would be an interesting discussion because there are so many considerations. I’ve thought about it for the last 2 years almost after realizing the challenges of the status quo.
The across the board funding cuts have had very much to do with the budget. If you read the bi-annual reports. You’ll notice a couple things.
- Recognition of the achievements of the communities in Tezos Africa
- The treasury size is at a fraction of where it was at the peak of crypto bull-season.
This is a clear and present reality. Hence why the last 2 cycles there have been proposals that have begun the process of achieving financial independence from these off-chain institutions as the only source of funding.
I caution you to not treat view organizations as ecclesiastical institutions charged with divine-like infallibility. Such thinking is a type of dependency that is not simply financial, but worse —psychological. I can’t imagine that there’s a single member of the Tezos Foundation that would suggest their decision making to be perfect, not as individuals nor as a body — and certainly I don’t think burdening them with that expectation is healthy for any of us, nor for their sake, nor for the ecosystem at-large. Such a mindset gives them too much credit and too much blame in times good and bad, respectively.
Sure, I respect your vote.
Having personally worked with Tezos Cameroon, I feel I have a few insights.
What seems to be desperatly needed for these bakeries are mostly infrastructure. Proper hardware, and internet speed/reliability is certainly lacking.
It’s difficult to draw users to delegate to bakers not currently active due to not having the required 6000 bond or their reliability is not good enough. Blocks/endorsements are missed often, making it hard to get new delegates and even harder to keep current delegates.
I see you’re referring to bakers, which is separate from the concerns for this proposal. I agree with those points, which is why we made Kuoka Project — which has its own funding program and fundraiser in partnership with Objkt, and contributed to by Artists and collectors in the ecosystem from around the world. The goal of the Kuoka fundraiser is to make these bakers permanent to keep them from being under-delegated, and to use any surplus funds to support infrastructural needs for those bakers.