expect mfers
5.6K posts

expect mfers
@expectmfers
for the ❤️ of mfers





Some thoughts on the mfers issues For those that had better things to do over the weekend, you probably missed the mfers internal strife The tl;dr version: ▪ a $130k transfer out of the unofficial treasury has led many mfers to demand greater transparency and governance over the use of funds ▪ the demand for transparency aligns with the initial intentions when the unofficial treasury was set up and there appears to be no justification to withhold information ▪ the demand for greater governance is new and doesn't align with the initial intentions but should be implemented if a majority vote is passed ------------------------------------------- The looooong version: What happened? 1⃣ A transfer of 10M $mfer (~$130k) out of the multisig unofficial treasury was questioned 2⃣ The response from one of the signers was seen as inadequate by several mfers 3⃣ Now, there seems to be 3 camps in the mfers community: (i) those that are happy with the status quo and trust the multisig signers are acting in the best interest of the community (ii) those that are unhappy and are calling for more transparency and better governance over the unofficial treasury (iii) those that don't care either way, because why would a mfer care? ------------------------------------------- Why this matters? Imo, this issue shouldn't be readily dismissed. The mfers collection is a key NFT collection in the space. It is intended to represent true decentralisation, cc0 and community ownership For those that don't know, in June 2022, @sartoshi_rip changed creator royalties so that the @unofficialmfers treasury received the majority of them. At the time of the change, sartoshi was told the multisig would be a 4/7 and that the 7 signers had a process by which mfer holders can vote on actions for the signers to take This has changed through the years and it seems that the multisig is now 2/5 and the last vote took place on 1 April 2023, even though funds have left the unofficial treasury many times after that ------------------------------------------- What are my thoughts? If I was adjudicating this dispute, here's what I'd say: 1⃣ The simple idea of mfers for those that don't know is that "we all mfers. there is no king, ruler, or defined roadmap" and that "mfers do what they want". So, sartoshi is not the leader and the fate of the project is to be directed by those involved i.e. community 2⃣ However, as we see from both IRL and web3, anyone controlling the money exerts influence. So, those that are signatories to the multisig exert a higher degree of influence, especially with regards to the unofficial treasury, than the rest of the community 3⃣ The only way to "democratize" the influence is to ensure that the signers act as representatives of the community. It was clear from the initial set up of the unofficial treasury by @the_imp0ster that it was for mfers to "do more cool stuff". It appears sartoshi agreed with this idea 4⃣ It is also clear from the initial set up that there was no intention for every transaction from the unofficial treasury to be voted on prior to it taking place. In the one year after set up of the unofficial treasury, there are only 5 proposals but countless transactions 5⃣ As a result, although some mfers may disagree with the status quo, there is nothing to suggest that a DAO-like governance structure (or otherwise) is required when dealing with the unofficial treasury. Using this as a justification for "forking" the project is unreasonable 6⃣ However, there is a clear requirement on the multisig signers controlling the unofficial treasury to ensure that every use of funds is for the sole purpose of allowing mfers to "do more cool stuff". There is no other clearer purpose 7⃣ The onus then is on the multisig signers to prove that every transaction undertaken from the unofficial treasury aligns with that purpose. If it is not, then that transaction does not align with the responsibility the signers have 8⃣ The only circumstance that would justify a transaction that doesn't align with the purpose is if it was voted on and authorised by the community 9⃣ The next steps then are: (i) Signers to provide transparency on the transactions, especially when questioned. There doesn't appear to be any justification for not being radically transparent (ii) Should a transaction from the unofficial treasury be required that may not necessary allow mfers to do more cool stuff, then approval should be sought for it (iii) Should the community require greater restrictions on the multisign signers or change their role from the original purpose, then they should make a proposal (iv) Any proposal that has a majority vote must be complied with by the multisig signers - Jabz, Web3 Adjudicatoooor















