If advocate a open backlog, that’s PM’d against burn rate and expectations, with that burn rate visible. Critical junctions / paths can then be perceived before time, with some experience built into to the team to pull out decision options. As complexity grows multiple workstreams will be required (core, innovation, frontend, consolidation, etc). Who’s going to pulling this together as a cross team bridge? Maybe not now but in a near future.
Multisig core team idea is very good.
The suggested individuals are very good from what I understand.
But adding more diverse team members would be nice, for diversity of ideas and ideals.
Follow Someone with heart!!
Chatted with @hariseldon2 and we will add Sabo as a core advisor too. Sabo has been killing it moderating the Pangolin Discord, and we would like to see them continue to do great work for Pangolin.
I would love to have more Ava labs members, however as mentioned it can be construed as a conflict of interest.
You also mention Roger. And I think he would be a great candidate. We have to ask ourselves as a community, where do our conflicts of interests arise.? This is true not only of Roger, but of myself and everyone involved.
How do we ensure no conflicts of interests arise? With Roger being an investor and myself a builder, are we completely transparent then in the projects we’re involved in? For example, I’m a founding member of Sherpa and Crypt. So how do we ensure that multisig/core team members at Pangolin don’t have conflicts of interest?
In terms of salary, we’re still trying to work out the details on how much percentage of our salaries should be in PNG vs a stable coin. We all have different situations so we want to ensure that we take that into account to ensure we can all pay our bills. That will be completely transparent, however we’re still working on some of the tax and regulatory compliance issues. Payroll isn’t an easy thing and we want to make sure that we’re compliant with local income tax law and unfortunately working through that takes time. This is a great thread that talks about some of the issues we’re going through https://twitter.com/jonsyu/status/1389635642196299776
Yup. We’ve got a Notion setup at the moment, but as we start growing, we’re going to need a lot of mature processes put into place
I’m fully behind this
I would assume that becoming the manager of Pangolin is a full time job and you will not work on any other projects right? This is really important information for the position and for the multisig. If you have conflict of interests because you have projects you would be more inclined to push it create issues specially due to the configuration of the signers right now (your close team is enough to approve anything)
There is no conflict of interests on being a Multisig signer on Avalabs, they are the foundation behind the ecosystem and they will push for things that make whole ecosystem grow. Same for Roger, he has been speaking and tweeting about every single project on the space, don’t see where the conflict of interest is.
With the current proposal, the existing team can take any decision and approve it with the multisig so, one of the main purposes of the multisig (need external/community review and approve) is not met. The team can go rogue and take all the funds if they want without nobody’s approval, that should never be a possibility on a “community driven” project.
I’m not saying to require vote for every move but, at least 2-3 external signers needed IS A MUST.
Great team, well articulated roadmap, excellent start. I support you guys. My question is, have you ever talked to Emin Gun Sirer on this new initiative and I would like to know where he stands among all of this?
This is NOT a community driven project. Its hariseldon2 and his 7 best friends choosing each other to lead WITHOUT a community survey listing all possible candidates. A FAIR way would be to have a list of candidates introducing themselves and then the community voting for the best candidate!!
Each of our decisions and ideas undergo a naturally process by discussing to plan, discussions, Theoretical implementation, control/inspect. While we do that, avalanche members are involved. We have decided that Avalanche must definitively have to be guaranteed 99.99% security. I do not know if Emin Gün Sirer receives a protocol or an verbal trial, but I’m sure the information is at the right place and right time.
I have never seen anything fairer than that this LIST, people are working for Avalanche and for Pangolin since almost the launch and won the confidence of people and continue to have votes. I do not know anyone who is not on the list that would not have earned it. Do not know someone, I do not. If someone had noticed me, then I would have noticed him somewhere, or someone else.
I have talked to Gun. He was incredibly cool.
Hey everyone, so I’ve had a lot of heated debate about this multisig. Everyone seems to have an opinion but yet ultimately it’s going to be up to me who receives the vast majority of the abuse. In that regard, I have to trust what I think is right.
What I think is right, is that just because someone is anon doesn’t mean they are less trustworthy than someone who is known. Seq and Xavier have been critical to this communities growth and excluding them because they want to remain anon, in my mind, for very valid reasons, doesn’t seem to me the right approach.
So I know I’m going to get pushback and potentially piss off a lot of people. But I’m going to go out on a limb and say that for the multisig, we allow anon members.
There will be background checks done behind the scenes, but if people want to be anon in Pangolin, then they have a right to their privacy.
If you disagree, I’d encourage you to vote against the proposal.
Not accepting Seq would be ridiculous. Few people are as committed to this community, with real skin in the game, like he is. Certainly none of the people making a commotion about this are. You’re making the right decisions here.
Well, we stay “anon” on Telegram and crypto Twitter but Ava Labs knows who we are in real life
was a weird controversy imho. Glad you stuck to your guns.
Both, the Avalanche Project and the Dex are a project of Avalabs.
It was reported in the entire media that pangolin should be controlled decentrally by the pangolin community.
In theory, this is a good approach that must also be implemented in practice. Otherwise Avalabs would quickly lose credibility because the Pangolin community would feel deceived and, among other things, would lose trust in the project.
We know of course that Avalabs only wishes the best for Pangolin, it’s their project. Success will also influence Avalabs and its other projects.
For this reason, everyone, i.e. when I speak of the interest groups, investors, developers, users, the Avalanche ecosystem, will certainly strive for the best.
It is understandable and from today’s perspective necessary that the owners of some ROLES remain anonymous. One of these ROLES could be e.g. ‘Admin in Pangolin Social Media’ such as Telegram Group, Twitter etc. ‘Core Developer of Pangolin’. Then we are not talking about Xavier or Seq, but about the roles in the multisig group.
So if in the agreement the ROLES would be holder of subsequent ROLES
- Admin of the Pangolin social media e.g. Telegram, Twitter
- Core development team member
are kept anonymous to protect the Pangolin project, then I can understand it better.
The approval process for the anonymous persons mentioned above must also be communicated to the community.
For example: the anonymous roles mentioned above are filled through an approval process in cooperation with Avalabs and Multisig members.
This process can be adjusted over time if necessary.
So let’s get things right.
I think Xavier is doing his job as admin in the telegram group Pangolin very well. Seq also writes a lot of important things. I don’t know who is behind Xavier or Seq, maybe that’s not a person but a group of people. However decisive is the honest handling and the transparency and thus also the credibility.
There’s no group behind “Xavier and SEQ” and Ava Labs knows this
What are we trying to do with this platform? I’m new, so a sentence or two would help me understand.
Are we simply here to make money, or work collectively to build something with vision, more than which already exists, something worth being part of?
Decentralisation was a key factor in what attracted many here. That said, we’re only here first thanks to the Ava Labs team. So with regards to some peoples concerns around anonymity (which I can appreciate) … imagine if Ava Labs created this and completely stepped away? Then what. Somehow that would seem unnatural to me.
Right now, I hope they are here, doing useful things and planning something great.
But as mentioned, I do appreciate the concerns that some people have, if true decentralisation is what we/you are really trying to achieve.
As far as I can see, proposals need a majority vote before being enacted? Therefore even if Ava Labs members were to be involved here in a dominant fashion, they would only be performing actions we had all voted on first? This seems fair to me.
If Pangolin grows, the team should with it, and you should achieve further decentralisation in representation.
For me decentralisation is still always going to require some level of trust in people. Like we trust the Avalanche community and team to continue to use and improve Avalanche, and like I’m trusting you guys not to sell all of your PNG right now.
Ava Labs and their team are the root, Pangolin just one flower of many budding projects in the Avalanche ec(h)oystem. I don’t think there is a clear answer to satisfy everybody for now, that’s why voting exists.
I do think we need the team at Avalanche (and each other) to keep doing good things, so I would just say be human and remember all of the trust (or was it belief?) that you gave each other (and which enabled you) to come this far.