Human Interoperability Metadata Standards and Ecosystem Maps: Do we need a set of metadata standards and definitions for defining ecosystem roles, relationships and sectors?

[benohanlon]

Give me a quick sanity check? Just back from Rare Evo, where sharing ecosystem maps (via NMKR) with the community was a huge success!

Key question that emerged:
Do we need a set of standards for defining ecosystem roles, relationships and sectors?

Creating a common language could:
• Empower the community to self-report and represent themselves accurately.
• Enable various data, insights, and intelligence to interact.

Rationale:
To unlock exponential growth from network effects, our ecosystem needs to become self-aware so its moving parts can work better together. This means looking beyond our own perception and line of sight; toward understanding the different roles we play and reaching a shared perspective. Even if we’re in different corners of the ecosystem and experiencing different needs, we need to know how to relate to each other and talk about them.

Next Step:
Would this be worthy of writing a Cardano Problem Statement?

Thoughts?

Additionally, I’ve posted this to Twitter with a Loom video if you’d like to watch it or amplify it x.com.

EDITED: here is the youtube video (loom video) I posted on Twitter https://youtu.be/Bjl8LXM_Psg

README

1. 21/08/24 @COSDpool suggested the ecosystem maps could be expressed in text as a Mermaid flowchart which I think could be a framework to use the definitions prior to as creative output Flowcharts Syntax | Mermaid

[Official_Jornlr]

From Telegram:

Me: Is this map where we believe the ecosystem is at now or where we would like the ecosystem to be or what?

Ben: It’s loosely where we are now. It’s a framework of roles we’ve identified that we think exist. We ran 1:1 research across x20 hyper connected builders to ask them what their needs, challenges and ideas of success were for each role they had. At the end after we’ve talked about what the community could for them we asked what they could do for the community. From those x20 100% said they’d commit time to it to develop it and 95% said they would monthly.

Then I took it to Rare Evo and dreps, Intersect and the community seemed to like it a lot. The idea that they could self-report and improve co-ordination using a framework like that to have a common language and maybe some visual outputs to help the community navigate it.

Me: I agree that those are good ideas but I believe Rare Evo and the ecosystem as a whole suffers from more of a problem like this:

I think until people can look past influencers via social media, and Rare Evo is a great example of the power of influencers, the ecosystem can not get to those ideals that you wish. I believe if somehow we could promote Vyra or whatever Cardanospot is doing as social media, you could fight this problem but for now, I do not see it changing via twitter.

Ben: We’re broadly agreeing I think because the people that matter are those that are willing to pick up a shovel? And for them you want them to be able to find each other and understand how to work together? That’s less about influencers and more about our community working together.

Me: It’s also reflected in our governance via catalyst and hopefully not via CIP-1694 because (and I know this is a cliché) popularity is the most important factor when it comes to governance but not necessarily popularity in the sense of past success = good candidate, but a strong twitter presence. There are some really good candidates imo this time around that have been elected to the ICC but idk. I’m really too harsh about these things most of the time.

Ben: Yep, so I’d define the problem as we’ve a lot of people in Web3 looking to be HEARD to get VALUE. This creates noise and competition.

What we need is more people in Cardano to be SEEN, to ensure they’re HEARD, so the community can know itself better and create VALUE. This creates signal and co-operation.

Problem: HEARD + VALUED

Solution: SEEN + HEARD + VALUED

dReps will have an important part to play. A human sensory network that could use maps and frameworks like these to scale insights.

EDITED for clarity.

Me: I agree with that! However, getting back to the idea of defining rolls at this time. I think that roles in this ecosystem are essentially defined. People either just do not care to go learn about them. I found that while campaigning for the ICC much of what I was saying people had been saying for literal years but people still hadn’t taken the time to learn about the ICC. At this time, I think about what I said maybe a year or two ago and that’s that we have who we have now and there needs to be more picking of specific people and companies to push the ecosystem forward at least until we get new blood via ADA pumping and people getting excited to join in.

I think maybe where my solution diverged from the rest of the ICC candidates was I wanted more process and roll defining in the constitution. At this time, there is a lot of technical influence in the constitution and I would call that a ‘manual’ rather than a constitution.

[COSDpool]

@benohanlon it is simply astonishing that you would recommend the Cardano Problem Statement (CPS) as a path forward after leaving the CIP Process entirely off of the ecosystem map.

Effectively this made the counterproductive marketing statement — very publicly at the recent convention — that the Cardano community fulfils all these ecosystem roles without a open standards process… or in fact any standards process.

This discrepancy is especially strange given that NFTs were offered for this map: since the standards for NFTs were all committed, synchronised and evolved together through some of Cardano’s earliest and most successful CIPs. Now an “ecosystem map” without a CIP process has been committed to the blockchain permanently through this round of NFTs.

This was all pointed out on the IOG Developer Discord, with no response as of this time. If you are looking for a way forward, yes of course it would help for IOG Marketing to acknowledge the CIP process in any & every way possible: since it currently appears to have escaped marketing efforts entirely.

As already emphasised on the Discord issue, there is no lack of support for CIPs from IOG itself: whose project teams remain committed through the CIP framework to documenting their work and providing vital feedback for standards proposed by the community. Newcomers to the process (including IOG Marketing team members) are welcome to learn more about the CIP process at the newly mounted Wiki:

https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/wiki

@benohanlon based on 3+ years of supporting the CIP process as an editor & co-architect, I would be happy to help you convert the ecosystem representation into a standardised document: ideally version-tracked as text. I can guarantee you would have huge support from everyone in the CIP community in this effort.

We could then be sure that further vital parts of Cardano’s ecosystem aren’t neglected… either in support or in public acknowledgement… through a document that can be continually improved by consensus, as all our CIPs are, without having to be constantly reformulated with each iteration vulnerable to manual errors and misunderstandings.

[benohanlon]

Thanks for the reply. Happy to continue here if you like rather than Discord in an effort to keep the conversation in one place?

I replied on Discord as follows “The CIPs themselves aren’t a role and this map is showing the roles/hats people can wear. I think definitely CIP Editor is missing. So it’s good feedback and this is exactly why a set of standards might be valuable so people don’t accidentally make omissions. Ultimately it’s a consensus that this is a probelm I’m looking for so perhaps we’re agreeing here?”

[COSDpool]

As posted on Discord (and yes please let’s continue here):

1. The role of CIP Editor would be practically valueless without the further roles of CIP Author, CIP Reviewer, and CIP “enlisted participant” (something like IOG’s Ledger & Plutus teams). Editors could not possibly do this work alone (I wrote here about why not: The CIP process is decentralised) & the best we can do is coordinate this emergent process between a number of voluntary participants (both individuals and organisations).

2. For this reason it would indeed be helpful to consider the CIP Process as an entity because of this organically developed role in the ecosystem: especially since vague entities like “Threat Actors” are also personified even though they really denote processes.

Thanks @benohanlon for engaging about this and I am sure the overall end result will be better than what we would have had otherwise (if the omission had never taken place).

[Official_Jornlr]

There is a place for CIPs in this ecosystem but that place is threatened if not enshrined in the constitution. I don’t blame Ben for leaving CIPs off the roadmap as they have historically been hard for people with no technical skill in coding to understand and participate in. The fact that this: Home · cardano-foundation/CIPs Wiki · GitHub wasn’t even started until last week shows the people running CIPs have a fundamental misunderstanding in regards to how people share information between eachother or it shows that this information has deliberately been gatekept.

It is true that this could have been promoted more by IOG/CF/Emurgo to the everyday layman. In that regard, I do think you do not have support from IOG. I have fundamentally disagreed with Tim Harrisons approach to ‘organic growth’ as it doesn’t exist if you are doing anything complex. However, this goes back to my comment earlier. IOG/CF/Emurgo needs to focus more on picking winners in this ecosystem until we get new blood. A winner that could be picked is the CIP process but I doubt IOG/CF/Emurgo would want to pick a group of developers who can not communicate to the rest of the ecosystem why they are doing what’s important. Sure, you can bang out a tweet and get 100 likes and a couple of reposts but out of all that engagement, who really understands what you are doing?

I really think that if you have 3+ years of experience in the CIP process, a standard document would already exist. You really should be upset at yourself if you are offended that the CIP process was not put on the map because the CIP process lacks these forms and methods of communciation.

[COSDpool]

@Official_Jornlr a lot of the material at the CIP Wiki was written and posted here over a year ago:

Cardano Improvement Proposals (CIPs) — Introduction from an Insider

… with repeated announcements on this Forum: so it’s disappointing that you missed it, because your participation in this long-running CIP educational effort would have been welcome.

CIP-0001 itself, which created the CIP process, doesn’t and shouldn’t have a scope for how people should learn about what CIPs are: including how to write one, how to read one, or how to review one. These precedents are all set by a countless number of open source standards and would be recognisable to anyone who’s followed a major open source / GitHub project over the years. The publication of the Wiki didn’t create this process: it confirmed it.

Editors & CIP process architects haven’t catered to the social networks or video mediums because it would be a direct violation of the standards process if we did. Social messages & videos are irrevocable and they quickly become irrelevant… the GitHub discussion of CIPs (including those that create the CIP process itself) are the opposite: they can be changed any time by consensus and they remain relevant through repeated iteration and improvement.

Even if no Cardano constitution validated or even mentioned the CIP process, the evolution of the Constitution and the technical means of producing & updating it would be defined as CIPs, with any intractable problems documented as CPSs. A major requirement of the Governance process is that the process itself should remain changeable by consensus: so what would be the use of video or other conventional documentation if it were guaranteed to go out of date within a few months?

The only criticism of the CIP process as “undocumented” or “gatekeeping” has come from people who can’t or won’t pay attention to the detailed discussion constantly created to bring consensus decision-making over Cardano standards out into the open. Hundreds of processes of CIP maturity & community discussion have served as examples of this: not just on GitHub but also here on the Forum and many times on conventional social networks.

So @Official_Jornlr it’s neither truthful nor productive for you or anyone else to claim that “communication” has never happened simply because you have never paid attention to it.

Other forum readers: if you would like to see one of the crypto world’s most interesting community sites, follow the repository links at the Wiki above (which have been there for 4 years running, not just “last week”) to see countless cooperative postings & educational efforts to:

• accommodate others’ points of view and make decisions only by consensus
• explain Cardano proposed standards better to non-experts
• cross language barriers and translate standards whenever possible
• ensure that standards remain useful for educational purposes
• establish enough reliability and accountability in the CIP process that CIPs themselves can (and they will) be used as the basis for Governance decisions and community voting.

[Jsierrax]

Hey Ben, it was great catching up at RareEvo always looking for ways and diving into the potential of the Cardano ecosystem. Your thoughts on standardizing roles, relationships, and sectors really hit home. As our community continues to grow, we’re facing some big challenges—and opportunities—that we need to tackle together. One of the biggest challenges is making sure that the world hears about the amazing work being done by groups like The Cardano Confederation.

The Silo Problem

With the map, you brought up a crucial point about the risk of silos forming within the ecosystem. Without a common framework, it’s easy for projects to start operating in their own bubbles, which could seriously limit collaboration and slow down the innovation we’re all striving for. This is especially true for initiatives like The Cardano Confederation, which is building nodes and ALBA Labs in universities across South America in more than 10 countries. These labs are providing essential education to enable the creation of enterprises that generate incentives for local communities—a vital mission that deserves more visibility and support. My question for you the reader to answer quietly is how much did you know about this project? Cardano Confederation is just one example of the wonders happening in the Cardano ecosystem.

The Need for Growth and Collaboration

As Cardano continues to expand, things are only going to get more complex. We’ve got everything from DeFi and NFTs to real estate and grassroots educational initiatives like those spearheaded by The Cardano Confederation. Each of these sectors brings its own challenges and opportunities to the table. In this diverse environment, a standardized framework isn’t just a nice-to-have—it’s essential. By setting clear standards, we can make sure all parts of the ecosystem, including those that are building critical infrastructure in underserved regions, are working in harmony, reducing friction and helping innovate faster and smarter.

Amplifying Unheard Voices

One of the coolest things about this idea of standardizing roles and relationships is that it could really help bring more voices into the conversation—especially those from initiatives like Token Mithrandir, a Cardano Confederation ecosystem that never stops working for the environment and creating solutions for local communities. These maps can serve as tools to ensure that everyone, particularly those in developing regions who might not always get heard, has a say. The Confederation’s work in South America is empowering communities through education and enterprise creation, and by amplifying these voices, we can show the world the true global impact of Cardano. In a decentralized ecosystem like Cardano, this kind of inclusivity is crucial. The more diverse perspectives we have, the stronger our community will be.

Facilitating Symbiotic Communication

Creating a common language would also speed up what I like to call “symbiotic communication” across the ecosystem. When we all have a clear understanding of how different projects and sectors relate to each other, we can interact more meaningfully. This is particularly important for connecting the groundbreaking work happening in South America with the broader Cardano ecosystem. The work being done by The Cardano Confederation in building educational infrastructure could inspire and inform similar initiatives globally, but only if we facilitate the right connections and collaborations. This kind of symbiosis is what will help the ecosystem thrive—allowing us to share ideas, resources, and innovations more efficiently.

Enhancing Ecosystem Awareness

Plus, having a standardized approach would massively boost awareness across the ecosystem. With clear, accessible maps and frameworks, it’ll be easier for everyone to see how they fit into the bigger picture, spot potential collaborations, and stay on top of what’s happening—whether it’s in South America, Europe, or anywhere else in the world. This heightened awareness will lead to smarter decisions and a more cohesive ecosystem overall, helping to ensure that initiatives like The Cardano Confederation are not only recognized but also supported by the wider community.

Aligning with Cardano’s Vision

And the best part? This whole idea aligns perfectly with Cardano’s broader vision of decentralization and inclusion. Cardano was built to empower individuals and communities, and a standardized framework would extend that empowerment by making it easier for everyone, including those in developing regions, to contribute effectively. By fostering a shared understanding, we can break down the barriers that currently limit collaboration and make sure all voices are heard.

Addressing a Real and Growing Need

This isn’t just about solving a theoretical problem. We’re talking about addressing a real and growing need within the Cardano community. The benefits are clear: fostering collaboration, unlocking the potential of network effects, and driving exponential growth and value creation. By bringing together different projects and sectors under a common framework, we can ensure that the ecosystem as a whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Engaging the Community

But here’s the thing—this effort needs to be driven by the community. We need to get everyone involved in developing this framework so it’s robust, inclusive, and something we can all get behind. By bringing a diverse range of voices into the conversation—especially those doing the hard work of building on-the-ground infrastructure like The Cardano Confederation—we can create something that truly reflects the needs and aspirations of the entire Cardano ecosystem. This is a meaningful way to push Cardano’s mission forward, and it’s an opportunity we shouldn’t miss.

So, in a nutshell, I think you’re absolutely right, Ben. Standardizing roles, relationships, and sectors within Cardano is a crucial step for ensuring our long-term success. By breaking down silos, fostering collaboration, and aligning with Cardano’s broader goals, we can unlock the full potential of what our community can achieve. These maps and frameworks aren’t just about structure—they’re about amplifying unheard voices, facilitating better communication, and boosting awareness across the board. And most importantly, they’re about making sure that the amazing work being done by groups like The Cardano Confederation gets the attention and support it deserves.

[Official_Jornlr]

Yeah, well that’s too bad you were too lazy to post anywhere besides this forum to generate traffic and it sucks that it sounds like CIP-0001 was flawed from the begining if it didnt include how to write a CIP or how to tell people about them.

Again, the average person doesn’t follow GitHub bullshit and doesn’t care to so idk why you think they would include you on a map that shows the average progression of someone who finds ADA. No idea why you think videos and social messages are irrevocable. Idk why you haven’t thought of making a new video or an update video if something is out of date.

Idk why anything from this point forward has to be defined as a CIP. I have no idea where this detailed discussion even takes place outside of CIPs and on the technical side of these forums. It is entirely helpful that I criticise you for not being able to understand this and for not using proper channels of communication.

Again, it is not I that has not paid attention. It is the rest of the community because you refuse to use things like Discord/Telegram/Twitter spaces to get your word out. Hell, no one in this ecosystem even uses platforms like Cardanospot or Vyra effectively.

It’s almost impossible to talk to you because of how warped your reality is.

[Official_Jornlr]

Here, take this as an example. @COSDpool

Pi comes out to do an interview with Pete from Learn Cardano. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pAMtvgh9HI

This happened 6 months ago! Last PR moment for the CIP people was 6 months ago! How do you expect anyone to know what you do or care if this is your PR? Or how vital some of these projects you have completed are for this ecosystem? No wonder you aren’t on the map!

If you want though, you can find my comment from 6 months ago on that video. Username is @dkkm10, same profile picture if you really don’t believe I don’t follow along with this shit.

Overall, my original discussion with Ben has to do with changing the function of influencers in this ecosystem. My goal benefits you too. You just don’t seem to get it no matter how many times I say it though!

However this is not to say it is entirely your fault or anyone in particular. I mean just look at the top of this forum post if you want more proof:

Going back to the last paragraph with my dialogue with Ben, I also concede peoples just do not take the time to go learn these things. However it’s not like you are making the problem any better! Either people who are filling essential roles need to do PR or all of a sudden we are going to have the political philosophers wet dream of a self educating liberal population! I can tell you, the wet dream ain’t happening!

[HD_5000]

Hi Ben
Your question stuck a nerve with me. I struggle with my “cardano identity” or being self-aware. I don’t know where I “belong” on the map and don’t want to limit myself, to self-report and represent myself accurately. I do believe this is the primary reason I don’t participate more in Discord/working groups. Even though I have attended the workshops IRL, Governance CIP 1964 workshop(6/23), Drep workshop (2/24), Drep Pioneers workshop(6/24), and now the Beta Constitutional workshop at Rare(8/24). So defining ecosystem roles, relationships standards would be something nice to put out. Thanks

[benohanlon]

My thoughts, @COSDpool @Official_Jornlr:

1. CIPs and CPS are platforms for formal discussions that require more effort than usual. They provide a structured approach to suggest, debate, and implement improvements, consolidating the strongest arguments in one place.
2. Tweets or videos don’t offer the depth needed for proposing standards. We need a format that allows for extended discussions and presents the most compelling case.
3. Each CIP or CPS needs a champion. The effectiveness of idea socialization depends on the champion; it’s not an inherent issue with CIPs. For instance, I socialize ideas before starting to gauge interest: x.com.
4. So, CIPs or CPS aren’t distribution channels but mediums for messages.

In this case, a CPS is appropriate as we’re discussing ecosystem standards for roles, relationships and sectors.

Do you think the forum is a good place to start drafting a CPS?

[benohanlon]

Yes, I’ve a framework of definitions I can share My thoughts were to write the CPS and then share the framework with those interested. However, maybe worth doing in parallel here in the CF forums?

[benohanlon]

I appreciate you. It feels like you’ve got a lot of experience and value; question is where to apply it. I think this is a great use case. If we had roles, relationships and sectors mapped we could then look to dreps and the ecosystem for them to articulate their needs and challenges. That in itself could give you purpose perhaps as a drep?

[COSDpool]

thanks @benohanlon - yes, that’s a good enough assessment and a good suggestion.

Regarding point 4: GitHub itself, which hosts the CIP repository, would be considered the distribution channel. Participants & interested community members stay informed about the CIP process & proposals by subscribing on GitHub (“Watch” at the top bar) so they get email about either everything or just the events they’re interested in.

Regarding point 3: authors and editors had an earlier convention of using the CIP category here on the forum for draft proposals & community discussions. It was recommended in the initial version of CIP-0001 but hasn’t been used in a while… institutional authors had never posted there & so it was concurrently removed as a general suggestion when CIP-0001 was updated, leaving authors to choose their own channel to solicit feedback.

That would still be a great place to start drafting your CPS. @RyanW and I can work with you there to refine the structure & accommodate casual community input before it moves to GitHub:

CIPs

Please keep in mind that a forum discussion may establish that this is not really a CPS, and it might not satisfy the characteristics of a CIP either. It will depend on how well your idea logically & completely characterises either a problem or a solution (see When is a design document not a CIP?).

Currently I believe the best, and perhaps a complete (without CIP or CPS) “solution” would be another GitHub repository with at least one Ecosystem Map expressed in text as a Mermaid flowchart:

Flowcharts Syntax | Mermaid

You can see Mermaid has all the features of the latest ecosystem map — including subgraphs to represent your “islands” — and having a text representation as the evolving core of the map would allow future versions to update & improve the process iteratively, and allow additions or removals based on community submissions… with graphical versions produced from that core as required.

I’ll be publishing a Mermaid representation of CIP “states” (the coloured tags) this week for the CIP Wiki and I’ll send it by way of example when ready. I would also be happy to co-write a possible CPS and/or CIP with you once you’ve posted an outline of your ideas.

cc @KtorZ @Nicolas @adatainment @werkof @rdlrt

[Official_Jornlr]

I partially disagree with point 2. because I believe that videos effectively provide the depth needed to propose standards but NOT tweets. Tweets do not do such thing.

I agree strongly with 3 but I would say that you are using champion in the place of the word ‘influencer’ or ‘marketing strategy’.

4. I fundamentally disagree with the idea that CIPs or CPS are mediums for messages. They are simply distribution channels as people do not communicate or spread ideas in the way that @COSDpool keeps saying they do. However, @COSDpool is WRONG to say that GitHub is a medium for messaging and (though not stated) ANY sort of idea discussion as this is not how people actually communicate! Same with the forums in this temporary state. People do not spread ideas via forums. They simply get information and go elsewhere to spread ideas. I continually propose that IOG/Emurgo/CF actually endorse an offfical platform for idea spreading such as Vyra or Cardanospot to fulfill this role yet I have been ignored for 3+ years! Yes, you can draft a CIP on the forums or Github. Just know that nobody is actually going to discuss them here or there. Why? Because this is not where the influencers are. Forums are not really supported by IOG/CF/Emurgo as they do not actively participate here. And lastly, don’t get me started on email marketing @COSDpool! That shit hasn’t been relevant to online discussion since the early 2000’s! Email marketing is simply a tool to drive traffic to where the actual discussion takes place which will NEVER be Github!

Now, if you actually want these forums to be a place for discussion @benohanlon, you need to get influencers actually on board with the forum format and use these forums effectively. I think Vyra or Cardanospot are a better place for that because I think the forums are not the best method for discerning information. The addictive gamified structure of twitter is much better. Hence my Vyra recomendation. How do you do that? You make ALL official government action ONLY valid via designated websites such as this one. Anything said on Twitter or Github or Telegram or Discord is to be invalid information. This coerces anyone who wants to be taken seriously to participate in governance in an organized and professional fashion. You codify this into the constitution and now you actually have an orderly process and you actually can have positive discussion about topics such as ‘defining roles’. I have discussed this before on Twitter with the idea of a press secretary that oversees all this in the constitution however, it’s not taken seriously cus its twitter!

[benohanlon]

@Official_Jornlr why not use CPS/CIPS/Forum as the end point at the end of the funnel? Social media and conversations elsewhere point here? Reading these posts leaves me feeling I’ve not articulated myself well.

1. The issue isn’t one or the other. It’s build on top of different mediums like lego to move people through ideas. For example, you won’t convince most people of anything from that one tweet. Repetition is persuasion. So you need to leave lot’s of crumbs and you’re looking for those that have the eyes to see and ears to hear. You lead them to a staging post where a campaign (for example CPS) can be built from. These are all tools in the toolkit.
2. In your example of Cardanospot or Vyra, I’d just argue those platforms could built CIPS/CPS into themselves better… so build on top of the existing infrastructure.
3. I admit I’m at a loss as to what all the confusion is about really? I’m much more interested in creating standards for roles, relationships (value chains) and sectors as I think this will help the entire ecosystem co-ordinate better. If we could solve any confusion and promote CIPs and CPS while doing it then great! And solve that problem of encouraging platforms to include.

One more point; I think I was wrong to say ‘medium is the message’ rather I was trying to articulate something about the medium demonstrating a ‘seriousness’ that most other mediums lack. When I write a CPS I am saying I am a lot more serious about this than most other conversations. This is the context and message I was alluding to but perhaps I failed.

[benohanlon]

@COSDpool this looks promising. I’m interested. The visual maps are just an output and I think creatives could do some wonderful things with them. The underlying framework could use something like this. I need to read more into it; thanks for sharing! Really glad we have this thread going so I can come back read. I will add a README to my first post where I can collect interesting ideas and resources

[benohanlon]

@Official_Jornlr looping back to your map here I think an ‘ecosystem sensing network’ could be built on top of this framework. In your diagram I’d imagine a drep would be at the end of each white line. They’re representing the ecosystem and would built relationships with influencers as they’ve a natural incentive to want to attract delegation.

[Terminada]

@benohanlon

When I write a CPS I am saying I am a lot more serious about this than most other conversations.

I totally agree. I think people can and will use whatever medium they like, including spoken words via face to face conversation, to generally discuss any ideas between friends and colleagues. However, if you are serious about proposing some development, improvement, or re-design, then the CIP/CPS process is the best way to effect change. Clearly producing “a set of standards for defining ecosystem roles, relationships and sectors” is exactly the purpose of a CIP/CPS.

As for the question about what social media platform should be sanctioned as the preferred location for general public discussion: We are trying to build a decentralised ecosystem independent of any proprietary protocols or centralised company infrastructure. Furthermore, we don’t want to require people to link everything they say or do to a telephone number so Big Tech AI can easily mine our thoughts and ideas for future individual exploitation. Consequently I think that rules out platforms like twitter/X, discord, telegram.

At least this Cardano Forum is run by the Cardano Foundation which is tasked with representing the Cardano community, so in that sense we own and control our data on this platform and anyone can freely join and keep a degree of anonymity should they so choose. If the so called “influencers” don’t want to communicate here then I hope for their sake they don’t lose their voice by saying something that upsets Elon.

@Official_Jornlr you seem angry and I don’t know why. I subscribed to receive notification emails about CIPs and I currently have 8717 emails in that list. It is an absolute hive of active discussions, most of which goes over my head, but I read what interests me. If you follow some of these discussions then you might form a different opinion about what value @COSDpool (Robert Phair) brings to the CIP/CPS process.