Pause GRIN Community Council - we need your opinion!

[Neo]

I’m not sure. That’s why I asked. If someone wishes to leave then I’d propose that a groundskeeper is added and assumes the bulk of admin responsibility: Agenda: Community Council (CC), 22 November 2022 · Issue #72 · grincc/agenda · GitHub

@davidtavarez

If no one assumes any responsibility of any kind, then there is no reason to exist.

I don’t know why you keep repeating this, you’re sounding like a broken record now. If no one had assumed any responsibility then we wouldn’t be having this discussion now, no funding requests would have ever been approved and and no txs would have ever been created/ signed.

You should just be honest and say what you really mean. IMO it sounds like you think some of us are useless, low integrity people who are not devoting enough time to the project.

Perhaps consider that members are reluctant to volunteer to take on responsibility because we can’t deal with the added stress in our life’s and can’t guarantee we’ll be able to fulfill those commitments for the foreseeable future. The whole crypto space is quite toxic and depressing rn and many have been stepping back to take some timeout.

@davidtavarez

The following questions must also be answered:

• Are CC members merely key holders?
• Who will be responsible for leading the meetings

• My opinion is that the community should hope CC members are more than just key holders, however, there shouldn’t be any expectation for them to be more than this, unless they’re fulfilling a funding request. However, if members can only just be a keyholder for a prolonged period, they should offer to step down. The most important thing from my perspective is that development moves forward outside of just maintaining the core codebase and the community has as many funding routes as possible. Grin needs to be keep building, everything else is noise.

• I could take responsibility for leading the 10:00 UTC meeting. But can’t even attend the 15:00 UTC since it’s 3-4am for me.

@davidtavarez

If the CC wants to continue to function, it would be best to define responsibilities, to begin with, who is responsible for drafting the transactions; that would be a good first step. But also:

A groundskeeper.

@davidtavarez

Add a maximum time limit to vote for a funding request, the minimum is known to be 2 weeks, but the maximum should be 4.

Ok

@davidtavarez

Add a limit of 24 hours to send the transaction of an approved request. 24 hours after the end of the meeting when a funding request is approved.

Disagree, as discussed in other chats. 48 hours.

@davidtavarez

As for the mining farm, it is needed to define the roles of who is responsible for making sure everything works, creating a report and being responsible for withdrawing the rewards every 2 weeks.

I can’t do this, but I suggest a CC member who currently has access to the GrinCC wallet.

@davidtavarez

Define how who is going to send the coins to compensate the Testnet miners that the CC said it was going to cover, how and when.

Have we voted already on covering electric costs? How long is CC covering them for?

• Funding requests need to be made for any electric reimbursement. Requests and payments would be inline with CC funding guidelines .Whoever makes the payment depends on 1) if it’s paid in Grin or BTC 2) If we add a groundskeeper who becomes a keyholder.

• I’m not sure how to prove said miners are on testnet. Would be easy to get a rough ballpark on how many were active if the testnet explorer tracked network hashrate.