Create an open member list
moul opened this issue · comments
Before anyone can fully align with the constitution as a member, I believe it's important to establish a temporary space for individuals to express their interest in contributing to the project. This allows them to participate in its development without the obligation of committing to the final decisions.
For this purpose, we could create a list that serves as the basis for a mailing list. This list would be used to organize Google Meet sessions where open discussions can take place, helping to minimize scams compared to a completely open system.
I propose setting up a dedicated repository in the Atomone-hub organization. Here, interested individuals can either create an issue or a pull request to add a file with their details, like so:
name: Manfred Touron
github_handle: @moul
email: manfred@tendermint.com
intro: “Blockchain engineer, decentralization enthusiast”Intro could be: “Curious staker” (not limited to builders).
Additionally, it would be beneficial to implement a mechanism to prevent email spam, while still allowing us to compile a list of email addresses for meeting invitations. This could be a simple cryptographic solution or perhaps a Google Form.
However, I think it's crucial that we maintain transparency and public engagement in this process.
Ok this sounds great as long as I can get a calendar invite automatically.
Real people, real faces, real names, perhaps we want to enforce to avoid being trolled by AI and shills.
This is a great idea actually. Helped prevent spam and AI ATTACKS
While I empathize with the need for spam prevention, wanting "humans only" and fostering true transparency, speaking for myself (and perhaps many of the voters who voted no on prop 848 of the Hub) this isn't really an option for all of us.
Cosmos Classic / $Gaia [my name suggestion :)] is a contentious issue, and compounded for many of us who are involved in or around the Cosmos Hub ecosystem. I'm sure there are many who would like to contribute and be part of the discussions, but its not a feasible risk we can take to show our support publicly
How about we continue having meetings just for identified members, but make sure to publicly share the meeting records? For those wanting to stay anonymous, they can send their thoughts via direct message to someone who attends the meeting.
Eventually, we aim to facilitate anonymous on-chain discussions through a NoVoters-only governance model or a similar concept.
Are there any other alternatives you might suggest?
This sounds great but I think it is not a matter of IF but a matter of WHEN we start seeeing twitter threads popping up regarding "Get ATOMONE airdrop by submitting information on Github".
As Jaek suggested calendar invite will work initially then maybe we can close or at least restrict anyone joining this program.