I will add that there is a poll on Twitter at the moment which is not looking very favourable for Cardano Foundation.
People are afraid to speak up because they don’t want to alienate themselves for potential opportunities, but I regularly get private messages saying “thanks for making your views known, I agree with you but I can’t say so publicly”.
Some humility and a plan of action from CF rather than defensiveness and deflection would be appreciated.
Here’s another one.
This majority in the community think CF’s performance is unsatisfactory, and at the moment, most people are voting to completely delete CF and replace it. I suggest people at CF need to pull their socks up and start actually delivering something other than hot air.
A lot of your rants sound like you think that CF gets regular funding from “your” ADA. That’s not the case. They got a share – the smallest of the three founding entities – at Genesis time and that’s it.
“Removing funding” would amount to undoing that, rewriting the blockchain. That’s a bit much sacrifice for your personal grudge that they do not do enough for the monkey picture faction of the community, isn’t it?
Just got to add to what @Zyroxa , @HeptaSean said - it was Emurgo that is supposedly the business arm for Cardano , CF was always been over-arching body, IO/CF picked up the slack (and yet hatred) from elsewhere for partnerships.
There is tremendous amount of work that goes across the board at IO/CF , those who are interested to verify (instead of get on influencer/twitter bandwagon) and contribute can see that. Remember things were really bad untill 1-2 years ago at CF, there is a lot of turnaround, you might also be interested (or not) looking at CF github.
PS: The above is me talking about CF’s non-marketing teams, I cant comment about the business side - where I agree they’ve been very counter-productive , atleast until 6-7 months ago.
There are heaps of problems in crypto firms (including cardano) that makes me question future of ecosystems, but ones getting popular on twitter or ones like this thread unfortunately seem misfire due to being incorrectly influenced
No, I just understand the economics of the blockchain. They were given free Ada at genesis, which they still hold. That ada would be worth nothing without the community who are holding Ada and giving it value, so their funding is directly derived from us, because if they didn’t hold that Ada, there would be less Ada in circulation, so our Ada would be worth more.
Plus, they stake that Ada and gain a significant amount of rewards on it, which does come directly from the community.
And yes, I am suggesting that we should fork the blockchain, and it is not a personal grudge - see the polls mentioned above, this is the majority view of the community - stop trying to deflect and minimize.
People have been trying to get CF to improve for a long time, they are showing signs, but they are also not doing enough. Stuff like this does put pressure on them. Attempts to minimise their failures or deflect blame elsewhere do not sit well with the community.
I am as much entitled to my opinion as you are to yours.
And I don’t give a shit about some Twitter polls.
Well I don’t give a shit that you don’t give a shit about Twitter polls. The point is, there is a lot of feeling in the community that CF are letting us all down, you can choose to ignore that if you want, but if it continues much longer, the community will likely take things into their own hands.
Again - it was true a year or so ago, not anymore - which is visible across a few dimensions (again - that does not mean successful partnerships , something that Emurgo should’ve done - and CF/IO have instead done at mediocre levels), but at the same time - you wouldn’t see folks talk about what they ARE doing on twitter and you can see stronger technical foundations coming on CF and as a result their repos too, coz it’s pretty easy to have entitled opinions without any checks to say random things and still get following/retweets/etc.
Anywho - I know I am not gonna be able to educate/change anyone’s opinions or force due-diligence for what’s available publicly to verify across the 3 orgs, as sheep as community has become to certain faces - it’s a moo point. Will just say I was much more with you on your rant on node github instead, as compared to this thread 
I’ll be sure to do the next one on Github
Maybe at the Summit!
mmm at the conf… yes.
I will just add that nobody even attempted to answer the entire point I was trying to make. There is no mechanism to hold CF to account. With no mechanism to hold CF to account, how can we ensure they are accountable? simping for them and posting their inadequate achievements like it’s something to be proud of, does not answer the critical question - which is:
what should the community do to change CF, if we are not happy with their performance? Which we are not.
It’s the same for IO and Emurgo, Cardano is centralised to the 3 entities, and that is supposed to change in future (for better or worse). This was devised by Charles to say if one of the entities dont work, other 2 should be able to hold them accountable. Community does not have a role in bootstrap ecosystem’s decisions (as much as Proof of concept governance systems think so).
(Just addressing this statement, I dont agree with most of your comments in rest of thread anyways as discussed in previous replies)
… and it’s also the same for most crypto projects inside and outside of Cardano.
They make damn sure that token holders are not shareholders of the project, that what they are selling in the ISPO/ICO/whatever are not securities, so that they remain a privately owned company not controlled by the token holders.
The mainstream of crypto has somehow managed to convince everyone that it would be a bad thing if the authorities that usually protect the rights of investors – like the US-American SEC – would be responsible for crypto projects. Hence, people now want to “invest” in projects, where they do not have any rights towards the entities running the project and all they can do is bicker on social media, where they only own “utility tokens” – or in the case of Cardano “commodities”.
The case is a bit better for a foundation. At least it is required to pursue the purpose written down in its bylaws. But other than the bodies of the foundation itself, the only entity that could intervene – in case of gross mismanagement or crimes – are the authorities of Switzerland in our case.
I want to share perhaps a more positive, optimistic, and constructive endeavor:
Not sure how this can be said with a straight face when the opportunity to integrate with Instagram was ignored. This is an outrage frankly.
this is unbelievable
Argh - thanks for reminder why I turn-off social medias in the first place…
The part you’re talking about - partnerships/business decisions/marketing - I excluded that in my reply above (excerpt again). I did mention what IS working and where - it is no brainer which arm is supposed to be looking after business and has been dormant for years
I don’t understand how people can draw the conclusion from “Cardano was not integrated into YX” that people from us would not have been sitting at the table, discuss, support and try to make it happen. What then led to what decision obviously is not something you publish or rant about on Twitter, because that would destroy any future relationship.
You’re quoting people who have vested interests in keeping Cardano Foundation on-side.
I hear what people say in private, and it doesn’t match up with this, not at all.
Please stop this deflection and denial - if the polls are anything to go by, when Voltaire comes into being, the community will vote Cardano Foundation out of existence given half a chance. Rather than trying to deflect this existential threat and pretend it’s not real, you need to address this.