The future of the Guardians

English General Discussions
42

Regarding what scope should the Guardianship movement cover I believe we need to prepare a list of scope items and let the broad Community pick and vote the ones they feel necessary.

We could have a period for a few weeks of preparing such a list and then have a Community campaign & voting process for another week.

To make it more efficient the voting would perhaps have to set priorities and not just select items, meaning everyone would have 1, 2, … , 10 “cards”, which they might put one-by-one on a scope item.

Like this we could have a priority order of scope items for the movement and decide to tackle the initial N number, which should be incorporated in the constitution of the movement.

This process could be repeated on a yearly basis to adopt to the changing & growing Ecosystem of Cardano, which might bring up new needs and redefine priorities.

Regarding the groups who wants to join the Guardianship movement, they would freely pick any number of the N scope items based on their preferences & characteristics, which would be somehow define their legitim mandate & mission.

If there would be some exclusive parts for certain items, such as the (1) you refer to in terms of the audit report, then a Group or two would be selected in consensus for this purpose. Such selection would have to depend on reputation, history, ratings, fitness, members profile and many other key attributes to make sure there is an objective decision.

IMO one thing is certain, such a critical & big movement and also the groups who wants to contribute with higher efforts will need some sort of funding. There might be groups who will limit their efforts so much, that they will decide to stay on a charity path.

We should really do this step by step (see proposed (A) … (F)) and with lot of patience to the process.

For now I would suggest to let everyone come up with any scope item he / she believes should be part of the Guardianship movement.

1 Like
43

The entire point of this group is to call for accountability and transparency behind those with power - CH

There should be a group of community members whose main aim in the context of Cardano is to monitor the activities of Emurgo, IOHK and CF.

This group might form part of a larger community organisation. Personally, I think there’s no need for that, and it might even be counter-productive. Given what the GoC did so far, it would be good if this group could carry on that tradition. But IMO it is more important than any of these considerations that there is such a group, and that it functions effectively.

So I believe this function should be prioritised, the group set up, and other possible activities and structures are considered later.

2 Likes
44

“The entire point of this group is to call for accountability and transparency behind those with power - CH”

This itself is a massive responsibility & significant effort and IMO it would be nice to have a few decentralized groups who share this scope item. As today the only group out there is “Guardians of Cardano”, that might be a good start. But hopefully other groups will soon join the movement and might pick this scope item as well. A handful of groups ensure better checks & balances, load balancing, fault tolerance, sustainability, integrity and risk mitigation.

The above scope item I see as the most critical subset of the Guardianship ideology, but there are few others (1) … (21) and who knows how much more that are important to consider and tackle.

45

Adding to the scope of roles and responsibilities

  1. Monitor the local in-country blockchain landscape with respect to the regulation, its central bank digital currencies development, institutional interest, various industry and its business challenges on the existing process, adoption rate, etc…

  2. Identify problem statements and proactively educate the business owner, find opportunities and explore collaboration with the in-country government, academic institution, business partner. Act as a bridge, advise and provide technical guidance if necessary and assist Emurgo in overcoming the business challenges faced in the local country.

There are many roles GoC can play. It all depends on the number of voluntary participants we can recruit within the GoC

2 Likes
46

I’m sorry to keep on about this guys, but while I agree with most or maybe all of this fast growing list of things that should be done, I just don’t see why they all need to be under the umbrella of the Guardians. What value does that add?

47

You are already talking about very specific scope options when you forgot about the start.

How about offering this option first:

A. The Guardians of Cardano is put to rest and actived when needed. (Everything else you do with a select few is fine, just not in this name)

and

B. Some of us continue with the Guardians of Cardano and will define in phase #2 what we want to work on and can be voted at.

Make this a community vote first, and then start thinking about things that will come later.

1 Like
48

Under the Guardianship movement and NOT under the Guardians of Cardano group.

There is tremendous value having a lot of decentralized, independent and self-organizing groups working in a light structure of a virtual organization within the umbrealla of a movement towards common goals, values and vision they share. This is a very powerful thing.

49

I don’t see that any goals, values and vision other than the belief in Cardano need to be shared by such independent and self-organising groups. Can you suggest examples?

50

When i look at it, we can still leverage the Guardian of Cardano’s identity to manage and take in more role & responsibilities. There is no harm and there is no need to put it to rest. Establishing a new identity is abit confusing and may not have that powerful effect GoC is having at the moment.

51

No this is totally wrong.

Having Guardians who left the group to lobby after to have the group put to rest doesn´t make sense to me.

What the Guardians of Cardano group will do is not up to a Community voting it´s an internal, careful decision to be made. Nevertheless of course Community feedback is important and is considered within the internal decision making. One feedback from Charles how he would see such a group to function in the future already implies that it should stay awake, aware and active, which I strongly believe in as well.

What is however up for Community consultation and consensus is whether a Guardianship movement is needed and how such a movement should eventually look like, what agenda it should follow, what constitution it should have. The Community consultation & consensus is essential to make it a legitim movement that is empowered to represent Community interest. What is a natural step after is for the “Guardians of Cardano” group to decide what scope items it would pick and try to tackle. Obviously being limited in numbers, competence and capacity it would be only a couple of items I guess, but this is again an internal decision to be made by the group.

As a summary such a Community vote you suggest can not take place because it´s for the group to decide it´s future path to follow.

1 Like
52

Yes and that should be harnessed by concentrating on the power-monitoring function first and looking at other issues later.

53

A vote can certainly take place, but it would not be binding on you or anyone else. And people can draw their own conclusions about the outcome.

54

Actually it’s quite the opposite what you are assuming. It build a reputation around Cardano when you have an self-organizing group to keep an eye on the 3 entities performance while independently support the ecosystem growth. Do you know why Bitcoin is so valuable and strong? Apart from Fed playing hard and loose with the public’ money, one of the reasons bitcoin is so valuable and strong is due to the followers behind it that create the network effect… There are many advocate bodies promoting bitcoin. If we can do a similar movement across continents sharing one or many identities, then Cardano will be just valuable.

2 Likes
55

I don’t see the advantage of the shared identity.

Even if it’s not, it will look like centralisation.

56

Why should Cardano have only one? No one claimed such a thing.

57

What is your agenda Rob?

It´s disturbing to have people who left the Guardians, actively promote that the Guardians should now go to sleep.

The “go to sleep and wake up in the future whenever called” is not a manageable, sustainable and realistic scenario. Examples of such organizations simply don´t exists up to my knowledge.

As mentioned this is also against what Charles commented on how he sees the Guardians to stay around and bring value to the Ecosystem.

Can you please define the value propostion, why it is good to shut down the Guardians? Who will benefit from that?

I only see you are argument, but I don´t see your vision.

What is your problem with a Guardians of Cardano group staying around and bringing value to the Ecosystem?

Please let us focus on the constructive part the Guardianship movement, and let the Guardians of Cardano group try to find it´s path on it´s own.

3 Likes
58

I left the TG chat, correct. And i’ve always said that i will remain a Guardian and be back when im needed. Does that say i’ve quit and should not have an opinion anymore? I don’t think so.

2 Likes
59

Of course we can have many movements with different identity established by other group. It’s up to us. There is no right or wrong here.

However with different groups/identities affiliated with just one identity, it makes this specific group looks more convincing, united and powerful. It’s also aligned with one virtual community we are forming.

Come at one point, those several groups with a slight different agenda/movement might join rank and come together as one. At least this is what happened in some political and NGO parties I came across - umbrella movement who wants more freedom from the China government and bersih movement in which the NGO is joined rank by several parties and bring their voice down and the street to ask for clean and fair election from the government.

2 Likes
60

It´s fine that you left and understandable. And it´s absolutely fine and more then wellcome to join back anytime.

What is not fine to passivate yourself and then expect and lobby for the Group to passivate itself as well.

Let the Group stay awake, aware and active. Or let the group make this decision internally and not in public.

I am afraid that brining group issues here is a bit delusional and disappointing, which is why I asked to focus on the Guardianship movement and discuss the “Guardians of Cardano” group somewhere else, well this should be or TG you left…

So please separate the Guardianship movement from the Guardians of Cardano group. As Guardians who left you are wellcome to join back the TG and discuss about group internals there.

Thanks for your understanding!

2 Likes
61

I’ve considered that option in the past but have not argued for it recently. What I now believe, as I thought I made clear just above, is that the Guardians should focus on the power-monitoring function now, improving tools, structure etc towards that purpose, and look at other possible activities later.

2 Likes