AIP-77: To set up an APE Coin discord channel - Brand Decision

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

We have sent a list of follow up questions from Special Council to the author

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

- river

2 Likes

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@wAPEd has responded to the questions from Special Council and are in review once again.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-river

3 Likes

I’ve been searching about discord channels topics and this is a great proposal!
It would be nice to have a fun and interactive place for the community. Channels for memes and artwork is what I’m looking forward to.
Thanks!

3 Likes

I agree and I will definitely support your proposal. Discord really helps a lot of people these days for easily communicating and showing their talents in arts

3 Likes

@Joi @HighDee
Thank you for the feedback! But for some reason my proposal is getting ignored for a few months.

1 Like

There is a complete ignore from moderators. Looking for help I tried to contact a few ApeComms team members @halina, @0xSword, @Amplify, and @Lost. They are also ignoring me, and that makes me suspect that they are somehow influenced moderators or Special Council to kill my proposal because it partly competes with their $998k proposal that they created after I submited my proposal for moderation.

1 Like

Hey, our proposal went up to vote and was rejected by the community on Wednesday, so we’ve had a busy week. I do know of your two proposals, one is a process proposal, and the other is this discord proposal. I do not know why your proposals are stuck. You will need to speak to the ApeCoin DAO administrators about this issue. We have no influence over Special Council or the ApeCoin DAO administrators. I’m hopeful that RedVulkans proposal AIP-144: Establish Moderator Response Time Guideline can help clear this up. The Apecomms proposal would’ve given us the ability to also check on the status of these. :frowning:

2 Likes

I’m sorry to hear that. Your proposal is great, please don’t lose hope!

3 Likes

@0xSword Did you or other ApeComms team members use The ApeCoin Foundation resources to get an advantage over my Discord proposal? Did you contact moderators, administrators or the Special Council members about any of my proposals?

1 Like

This is a great idea. It would bring the community all together!

4 Likes

@wAPEd No, and No to both of your questions.

1 Like

Sounds like a lie because today I got information that you have already used the newsletter you are getting paid for by The ApeCoin Foundation to attack my Discord proposal in order to benefit the counter ApeComms proposal.

2 Likes

@wAPEd AC Watch is an independently ran newsletter, where I receive a grant each month to speak about news, opinion, more on the ApeCoin ecosystem. I often give opinions on proposals. In that same article, I showed favor for marketplaces, though I still participated and treated all of them with respect. I apologize that you are aggravated by this. However, as token holder, I am allowed to voice opinion, concern, and support for projects.

I cannot and do not represent the Ape Foundation views on any topic, which is made very clear across the entirety of my publications. I disagreed with your proposal in July, before receiving my grant, and voiced publicly in this thread. I still feel that hiring outside moderators vs active DAO members is not the way for a discord to operate, and I made that known, as is my right to do so with any proposal. I am under no obligations to suppress or be neutral in my opinions either here on the forums, in my newsletter, or elsewhere.

3 Likes

@0xSword Your opinion piece in the August 18th ApeCoin Watch newsletter is a clear conflict of interest. The scope for your newsletter DOES NOT include opinion.

From AIP-66 reads:

“It should be an aggregation of ApeCoin specific ecosystem news, AIPs, conversations, opportunities and content sourced from Discourse, Discord, Twitter and other internet destinations. The newsletter should promote and educate all things related to the ApeCoin DAO.”

What you wrote on AIP-77 is a hit piece. As far as I can tell, you did not write any other such opinion piece since you won the grant.

I don’t support AIP-77, but I genuinely feel bad for @wAPEd. You’re using your ApeCoin-funded grant to write personal attack pieces against other community members, presumably for your own benefit via ApeComms. This is sad, inappropriate, and completely unacceptable.

From your newsletter - “My problem with it: Who are the mods? Not me.”

Not cool.

6 Likes

Ser, your interpretations may not have complete context. Countering a proposal is not a “hit piece,” against an author. I am not willing to argue about this. I continue to believe that we should “hire” from within the DAO. More opportunities for working groups are coming as a direct result of my many months of advocation & full-time effort.

I also personally have been a powerful advocate for keeping the proposal process open to all, preventing barriers to entry, and inviting new small token holders(like me) into the ecosystem. There are many who believe we should raise the threshold. I disagree, as it closes our door to new ideas & talented people entering the DAO. What would it mean to you if an idea required 600 $ape fee, discourse use required 250, etc etc?

The newsletter will continue to operate, as always, & grow based on feedback. A month after the post in question, key feedback was given: “I don’t always agree w/ the point of view, but reading AC Watch is an essential part of DYOR for DAO voters.” I have since worked to improve on the newsletter readability, my own journalist standards, & writing skills.

3 Likes

Why wasn’t this moved to another phase of the AIP Draft / Proposal?
Does it seem a long time stopped on Cartan’s side?

3 Likes

Oh wow… I’m quite disheartened to read this. I’m sorry this happened @wAPEd

If you believe so @0xSword , why on the paragraph “My problem with it: Who are the mods? Not me.” you replied “Me.” Insted of “Not people within the DAO”

That would’ve made it less personal… But the way you wrote it, clearly shows that you Personally wanted to delay AIP:77 for your own benefit.

With behaviours like these are we really advocating for decentralisation? I wonder what the overall community feels about this…

1 Like

@wAPEd we have tried to connect with you and you rejected the request. I would love to have a conversation about your proposal, activity, region and so forth. Please feel free to message me anytime so we can setup a chat. All the best, bc

7 Likes

Cool, @bc. Thanks for more context about the AIP-77 Draft :+1:

2 Likes

I’m glad to see bc engaging and clearing the air on who “has the ball” for this proposal.

@0xSword your response adds no relevant context. Yes, you’ve been a helpful voice in this forum. I’ve looked up to you. However, there’s still a glaring conflict of interest with writing opinion pieces in a newsletter which is funded by ApeCoin grants. Especially when you are heading up a competing proposal. Since this is now a sidebar discussion and next steps involve bc and wAPEd, I’ll take this elsewhere.

2 Likes