Quote from: rickyjames on February 20, 2014, 03:12:43 AM

Quote from: VanBreuk on February 20, 2014, 02:56:07 AM

Quote from: rickyjames on February 20, 2014, 02:46:26 AM

Quote from: pinarello on February 19, 2014, 11:19:45 PM

Quote from: abuelau on February 19, 2014, 11:16:18 PM

Quote from: pinarello on February 19, 2014, 11:13:00 PM

Quote from: pinarello on February 19, 2014, 11:16:08 AM

8 projects waiting for approval in infrastructure committee:

https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=806&p=3877#p3877

2 projects waiting for approval in marketing fund committee (salsazc please look for double entry with your administered fund)

https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=807

please go discuss and vote.

thank you

update committee boards:

NXTinfrastructure board: 9 projects ----> 1 validated, 7 non objected, 1 objected

If no objection by tommorrow first project "payment modules for the main open source ecommerce and CMS systems" project leader Damelon, will receive 50K from the infrastructure unclaimed coins fund.

Any objections can be formulated here: https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=806&start=20

NXTmarketingfund: 3 projects------> 2 non objected, 1 objected

https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=807

NXTtechfund: 1 project------> more info required

https://forums.nxtcrypto.org/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=808

What happens to the objected one?

If no concensus committee has to vote (voting system tbd, non gameable voting system)

Woah, woah, woah. I want to call a time out here for a few pages.

I'm not trying to be the Grinch here, but I STRONGLY think we've got to get a better handle on this whole process before we just start handing out NXT left and right to ANYBODY.

The infrastructure spending thread has been open for all of about 36 hours. Already we've got 9 projects in the queue and only 23 posts in the thread - less than 3 per project. There is NO WAY we have given the proper amount of deliberation to what is being proposed here. And a vote is being called for already if we haven't achieved agreement as a committee?

Um...what's wrong with this picture?

I am a big believer in spreadsheets to collect all the data in one place and if ever there was a need for them, it's right now. We need to generate a standard spreadsheet listing who is asking, what their project is, how much they want, and a link to a thread that talks about their individual project. Just for starters.

We need to establish a rule that nobody gets a vote on their project for at least a week after they've proposed it to avoid the exact kind of rush to judgement that is happening here. I would personally prefer at least two weeks, but I don't want anybody to think I'm TOTALLY crazy...

I also sort of thought there was gonna be some kind of vetting of people putting their names down for committees, where they would have to put in at least one post describing why they thought they were qualified to serve on a committee, what they wanted to accomplish there, blah blah blah, and um....we might actually VOTE IN A POLL to pick the top 5?

Instead it's just put your name down as a candidate and you're in? On as many committees as you want?

So how is voting for funding going to work in a group of people like THAT?

Hey, I'm all for rapid progress but we've got to establish some kind of initial setup and standards here and PACE OURSELVES FOR THE LONG GAME or this bounty of NXT is going to be gone in a FLASH.

I say forget about voting NXT out of the treasury for at least a few more days and lets go back to setting up the committees themselves and the "paperwork" that defines the process we are about to embark upon..

Agreed, somehow I assumed the debates in progress had no actual executive power.

So first things first, what about opening a new spreadsheet where members volunteering/applying for the committees can enter their profile in a comment field? Then set polls.

Having made a general expression of dismay a few posts back, let me zoom in here a little. Pin, I like you and we see eye to eye on a lot of things and I applaud your initative and these committees can probably use a Trail Boss and you might very well be the right person for that task.

But I gotta call it like I see it. And one guy who has not been voted in to be a leader just cannot make statements like "If no objection by tommorrow first project XYZ will receive 50K from the infrastructure unclaimed coins fund." and "If no concensus committee has to vote" when the committee hasn't even had time to say boo to each other yet. I haven't gotten involved yet because I thought we were still in some kind of phase where people were still putting their names in to APPLY for the committee.

Somehow I missed the memo that we've got the tach redlined while we're screaming down the freeway of love in a pink Cadillac.

So I'm gonna say two things and shut up. I hereby vote no on every single infrastructure project until I see its details on a spreadsheet line. And I'm gonna go off and create that spreadsheet right now. I'll be back with the links.

The community must come to a concensus as to who is the person authorized to request the treasurers to make a spending transaction. Each treasurer should "take orders" from one person only, and ideally it should be a different person for each fund/treasurer.

Pouncer

Posts

Merits