Giza release progress update
- We're still working on getting the Giza network out ASAP, the best estimate for the release is late December.
- Giza release involves the introduction of the Distributor Working Group and two more Operations groups, so we're hoping there will be lots more space for more people to participate on the DAO.
Can future projects fork Pioneer the same way Atlas can be forked?
- Any project can fork Pioneer, certainly Substrate-based projects may have some use for it, though it might be rather challenging for projects whose underlying blockchain structure/runtime is too different from our own.
- In another sense, it is of course possible for any person to run their own fork of Pioneer, in the same way as Atlas; it's likely that Gateways might offer some fork of Pioneer as a public service so people can look at both the content side (Atlas) as well as the governance side (Pioneer).
Mainnet voting power
- Voting power won't be concentrated in validators and nominators, this is a misunderstanding. Any type of staking (e.g. as a working group lead or worker, or in a proposal) allows the re-use of these tokens within governance (i.e. voting within Council elections.
- The main difference between testnet and mainnet from the current perspective is mainly that we cuurrently don't have very good incentives for voting in elections on the testnet.
Will there be KPIs on mainnet?
- No, there's no formal KPI system within the current mainnet design, though the governance side of the platform (voters and Council Members) can implement any management technique that they want (OKRs, KPIs, or some other mechanism) to guide the Council in the decisions that they make.
- The Council mint will be topped up automatically over time on mainnet, giving the Council a budget.
- The KPIs and associated rewards on our testnet are an artificial mechanism, representing a market (Jsgenesis) giving a signal to platform governance about whether we consider the current testnet situation to be good or bad.
Feedback to Jsgenesis
- The most useful feedback for us is where people can solve the projects which they are identifying. We're very happy to provide people with the resources to solve problems when they raise issues, this can perhaps most effectively be done by making a formal proposal on the testnet for funding or whatever else might be required.
- Solving problems under your own steam is actually better than doing KPIs or other structured testnet activities, as on mainnet, we will need people with this sort of attitude!
How can new participants get Council seats?
- At the moment, lots of testnet tokens are required in order to be elected onto the Council (at the time of the call around $700 in tJOY is required).
- Jsgenesis will vote for any community member who can provide some evidence that they would be an effective Council Member, as we're very keen to promote new talent and give newcomers the opportunity to try this important platform role.
- Jsgenesis may try to "sudo" the Council in future, to ensure that there is a good proportion of new members having the opportunity to participate during every round.
What are the most valuable activities for getting FM points?
- As has been mentioned before, participating in platform roles, being an engaged Council Member, participating in bounties and original projects are all excellent ways to move closer to the Founding Member status.
- We would like to make it clearer that the Council should try to fund spending proposals for projects which are in the long-term interest of the project, and we are currently working out the best ways to incentivize this.
- Bedeho reiterated that the most valuable people to the project are those that can "identify and solve problems on their own".
How will the DAO governance be secure and robust on mainnet without Jsgenesis involvement?
- Jsgenesis will hold very small part of supply at the time of mainnet launch, and it's correct to say that JSG as an entity won't be actively involved in the platform governance at that time (or ever, for that matter).
- Founding Members seem very likely to be in control of the system more than any random person or faction who might purchase some portion of the JOY token issuance after launch.
- Longer term it's obviously not clear who will hold tokens and how that will affect the governance system, though at the mainnet launch we are pretty confident that tokens are being given to the right people in order to make sure that governance works effectively!
- Constitutionality will mean that high impact proposals will need more than one council term in order to be approved, to allow increased scrutiny and maintain the integrity of the network.
How will FMs be able to control the platform with just 15% of the genesis issuance?
- The 15% figure in terms of the community control of the platform is way too low, perhaps even by two or three times.
- There are plans for governance blacklisting, which means that people who don't want to be involved in governance (perhaps investors or other more passive stakeholders) can lock themselves out of the governance system for a certain period, in order to increase the control of the Founding Members and other community token holders.
Does Joystream plan to be a Polkadot parachain?
- The number one feature we want is interoperability and you don't necesarily have to be a parachain to have this, though probably it's the smoothest and easiest way of achieving this goal.
- It's too early to say which relay chain we would be a parachain of, the reward schemes associated with getting a parachain (e.g. crowdloan) etc. and these other finer details.
- One reason we might avoid becoming a parachain is if it turned out to be extremely expensive (in terms of giving away too much of the network token issuance).
All forward looking statements, estimates and commitments found in this blog post should be understood to be highly uncertain, not binding and for which no guarantees of accuracy or reliability can be provided. To the fullest extent permitted by law, in no event shall Joystream, Jsgenesis or our affiliates, or any of our directors, employees, contractors, service providers or agents have any liability whatsoever to any person for any direct or indirect loss, liability, cost, claim, expense or damage of any kind, whether in contract or in tort, including negligence, or otherwise, arising out of or related to the use of all or part of this post, or any links to third party websites.