This was the article [Testing Framework(Athens to Babylon — Part 1: Testing Framework and Test Driven Development)] we wrote and was our cry for help to get funding for testing. We were not asking for direct funding but a decentralised way to be rewarded us for the efforts we did on the testnets. Unfortunately we had to close down our testing operations last month after running for almost 3 years. It’s a shame but we no longer covering our costs to even consider the luxury of running test networks. If strange that the foundation is so rich but the community is so poor. We don’t want handouts and won’t go begging but we want ways to incentive us to provide services to the community, we at Tez Baker failed to achieve this but hopefully others are more successful.
Let me get this straight, you asked for grant funding, but then you say, “we were not asking for direct funding”. That does not inherently make sense at all. How about this TezBaker, put your grant up in Agora and let the community decide if it is worthwhile or not instead of making allegations and pointing fingers. How about you put your exact grant and the amount you were asking for and let the community decide if this is something we should be up in arms about?
It cost so much to run a testnode… let me tell you… I run 1 of them, and you know what it cost me? My monthly internet bill… Your guise of feigning can’t make ends meet, not profitable etc, is very disingenuous. However, I will say your testing proposal is actually very good and more should be revisited on this.
@Barry_Badrinath why are you being so aggressive, I was just asked to clarify our position? You are reading two different parts of our message and combining them. We applied for a grant early on and didn’t get any feedback why we were refused. Then we said for testing we were not looking at direct funding but suggest ways in which testing could be funded. Two different issues.
On cost we run all our infrastructure in tier 3 data centres as we are a professional organisation that we provide institutional level service and yes it is expensive. We never said anything about we can’t make ends meet! We said it is no longer a viable venture for us and gave you our reasons. We are running negative carry on Tezos so that is a situation we can’t maintain forever.
I never understand these forums as I try to explain our rational and we get shot down with aggressive response. And to be clear I was not pointing fingers at anyone I was just replying because you said to @xpop we wouldn’t come on here to comment. Anyway good luck with your venture on Tezos in the future.
I apologize if I came off aggressive, and I really do commend you for stepping in and responding. I do think the testing framework you laid out was good, very good to be precise. I understand your decision and you are running a business after all, so business decisions need to be made. I do hope that that this topic of response times/feedback is addressed. Best of luck to you all at TezBaker!
I wonder if TEZ Baker applied for a grant today, what would the outcome be? Since the Tezos Foundation got a “reboot” of sorts in August this year, perhaps things will be different?
We need to strike while the iron is hot to solidify Tezos as a long term crypto leader. This means supporting anything and everything that has a reasonable chance of boosting the community.
The ultimate issue here is the TF has an attitude of “we fund things, write a proposal, we will see,” which would be fine if there was transparency in the process from end to end (barring a few obvious details of course, I’m not a madman). Without transparency people see certain things wither and certain people complain about the process and there is nothing to reference so it turns into a she said he said situation.
We have the STOs, we have the institutions, we have the bank forges. Well done Tezos Foundation! What we need to do is secure the goodwill of the community. The better the goodwill, the stronger the cohesion, the more legitimate we will be for the long run. This will translate into more bakers and more devs, the people who form the spine of this project.
Hello, What is tezos foundations role in marketing? The white paper promised such things as ‘buying a tv station’… But there is almost zero presence of tezos within twitter or any social networks. With so much money donated by ICO investors such as myself… We expected a lot more on this front. Marketing and building more than just a community of developers but also a community of investors, can this be made more of a priority in the future? We need both.
This post deserves a reply
Strategy is that blockchain platform offered by tezos is so advanced that people will be coming to it themselves, without any marketing.
I’ve seen that tweet which might help you: https://twitter.com/TQTezos/status/1336681253358227458
" Kiln 0.8.3 is now available. This version primarily fixes a post-Delphi issue experienced by some 0.8.2 users in which the Archival node was on the wrong branch. Users running 0.8.2 don’t have to update. Visit https://tezos-kiln.org for more information."
that is the stupidest thing i’ve ever heard in the crypto space… shit coins make up the top 10 mostly… and their volume is often 20x tez at least… and the tech is currently much better… soo
I was being facetious.
sorry ive just been getting fed up lately
We’re entering a scary time in terms of how the broader community is viewing TF- for a long time benefit of doubt has been afforded to TF’s behavior, but that appears to be rapidly coming to a halt. The failure of TF to alter its baking behavior is becoming a serious point of contention. With TF dominance of baking, many bakers are leaving as they can’t succeed beating network inflation by 1% after TF’s massive share of baking rewards. Exactly how far is TF willing to push the community to the breaking point and drive away new and old participants alike?
