Forbole voted “Yes” on Proposal 29 of Cosmos Hub
Iqlusion, one of the prominent validators and contributors in Cosmos, have made this Proposal 29 titled “Genesis fund recovery proposal on behalf of fundraiser participants unable to access their ATOMs”
- To vote for the captioned proposal, you may refer to this.
- For full proposal, please read this.
- To discuss with the community, please do it here. (I strongly recommend you to read the discussion)
Forbole has voted “Yes” and I will try to explain briefly the rationale.
I would like to share with you my opinion when I first discussed 100% slashing on Solana’s forum:
100% slashing is changing “carrot and stick” to become “carrot and nuclear weapon”.
I think emphasizing penalty is not the right direction to go. I prefer to think more about the benefit side. We should focus more on benefits, values, well-being and love.
I think this represents the brand of Forbole pretty well. We are here to contribute and to help based on the incentive design. Incentive can mean different things to different people. This is not always directly or solely about money.
We don’t agree on penalizing people for the sake of penalizing. The world has enough conflicts and chaos. Whenever possible, I think we should try our best to help each other to make crypto space more user-friendly, lower entry-barrier and drive wide adoption.
Our incentive to vote yes is that this well-thought-out proposal can show the spirit of cryptos. We are human not robot. We have bigger evil to fight: corrupted centralized financial world, racists, dictators, terrorists, etc. We should treasure this chance to know each other here in Cosmos for the same goal. We should try our best not to leave our comrades behind and get hurt.
We think the concerns of Jae Kwon are valid:
So this is not an absolute no-brainer yes. Rather, our decision is made after considering the upsides and downsides. We believe the proposal will bring us more good than harm.
Even some shortcomings (as described by Jae) really happen, we think this is also a very good lesson for not just Cosmos Hub but to everyone concerning about on-chain governance. Projects and participants should see this as a textbook example how to handle fundraiser, middleperson and transactions.
Let’s realize this fact: this was early 2017 and people at that time were not as savvy as they are today. Bitcoin, Ethereum, Cosmos… they were all experiments. They are still experiments. Proposal 29 is a very good example of how a proposal has to be discussed, drafted and executed.
If we have time machine, we can rewind this issue. But we don’t have time machine. Now the decision rests on the stakers and validators. No matter the proposal get passed or rejected, each of the result will have its own specific metrics of benefit and risk factors. We decided that a yes to this proposal is a better choice.
If you agree on our vision, please help to spread the words by retweeting this tweet.
