thanks for the response @rickymac, I already knew/know about the clips channel, hence my alluding to JRE since it has a “clips” version as well.
I guess i was asking more as a broader wider mitigation to it not reaching it’s aspiration as defined by it’s audience/community…
My suggestion to you… Any one is welcome to start their own podcast. There is plenty of room out there for more. If some one does not like the format, make one you do like. If some one does not like 1 hour, make a shorter one. If some one does not like the hosts style, find a host you like, there are a ton out there.
We have a good sized audience, sorry if it does not meet your expectations misteraxyz . I am working hard to improve but maybe most people do not know that Philippe, myself and Sebastien have full time jobs and families to look after regardless of the podcast.
In case nobody noticed, Philippe, Sebastien and I created our own successful youtube channels before we decided, with community encouragement, to dedicate our own personal time, effort, talent, and resources into The Cardano Effect podcast. This is a fair statement for me to say (since I am being scrutinized here). I welcome feedback, and I also provide feedback myself.
Cardano is gonna be huge, and we hold no monopoly on the podcasts.
I appreciate your candour @rickymac, my intent with my inquiry is to question a process not a person. it’s not my intent to “scrutinise you” as you put it.
I was just under the impression that there is a monopoly on access to say the guest as there’s the impression that your podcast is supported by iohk etc by means of access and an assumed monetary compensation? i guess lack of clarity/transparency on such things makes it difficult not to see it not only as a monopoly, (one that leaves more to be desired) but one which we’re just stuck with.
I will refer you back to your original post that had nothing to do with transparency or access, and also happens to be off topic.
There is no actional feedback in your either your original or your second post. Your posts had nothing to do with “question a process not a person”. The only feedback you have given is acknowledgement that the podcast is boring.
You are simply changing the subject, again, still off topic of this thread.
If you must know, I personally emailed every single guest, person to person, as a polite gentlemen. That is how we get guests on the program. Hours and hours of writing emails. It works.
it speaks volumes that instead of being forthcoming, have the humility to take on feedback and respectfully respond - you’re choosing to be defensive and evasive.
i’m disappointed, i expected better.
Your original post was not respectful at all. Try starting off respectful in the first place.
As the person that started this thread, I ask that you keep the personal shit out of this forum.
what? i’m baffled!
in what way is what you’ve quoted me saying “personal shit” …please, explain…
You don’t see this as personal?
The Cardano Liquid Democracy idea is nowhere near Anarchy, imo Anarchy is somewhat like house rules when playing drinking games, the “House” has a specific set of rules that are known and understood by those that have been familiarized with them overtime, but yet with Cardano the rules of the protocol are set in code, outside of any specific wishes of a “House”.
So any reference or similarity drawn that Cardano has the same quality’s is not fitting to the movement of the technological POS protocol that Cardano will have that could be compared to other democratic solutions.
Just saying.
I agree. I read that Cardano’s mission is more about balance and less about (total) anarchy. The A from Ada is a tribute to Ada Lovelace and had no intention to be related with anarchy. Perhaps a Lovelace logo? Here are four citations to support my claim:
https://iohk.io/projects/cardano/ citation: “As a whole, the protocol’s design is geared towards protecting privacy rights of users, while also taking into account the needs of regulators.”
https://whycardano.com/regulation/ citation: “A cryptocurrency designer can surrender principles and yield to whatever demands their local jurisdiction places upon their code, thereby compromising the privacy and integrity of their users. Or he can adopt a more principled, but anarchistic, philosophy that divorces itself from current best practices and laws.
For Cardano, we feel this narrative is a false dichotomy brought on by a lack of imagination. The reality is that most users are not concerned about rules existing for markets. They are usually concerned about sudden changes in the rules to benefit one or more actors. They are worried about a lack of transparency over who gets special privileges.”…
https://twitter.com/IOHK_Charles/status/1086381532791664641 citation: “Always and I always will keep that philosophy. The highest achievement in business is to make the world better with a sustainable business model. This is and will always be the core of IOHK and my work in cryptocurrencies. Our company has been dedicated to this since 2015”
https://cardanoroadmap.com/ citation: “Three principles that guide the development of the roadmap are: first, the growth of the community and its needs; second, a distributed and resilient network true to the original vision of Satoshi, and third, balancing the pace of research and development so commercial advantage does not win out over the application of scientific rigour.”
