Goes to engrave his precious Talismans

It's a bit more complicated than just aiming for a win percentage. We can build bots you'd never beat that hold a 50% win rating. We actually did this early on. The bots are much more dynamic now and we

Just to be clear, in case it wasn't... the entire point of this current exercise is to test the liquidity bots. You pretty much shouldn't be seeing a human when testing in survival modern manual brackets

I'll just defer to the boss's response. That pretty much covers most of my thoughts on the topic and anything else I have to say on the matter isn't worth the drama.

Yea fair enough. I think this is a situation that is much more complicated than a normal sale. I'll vote to give more time, but in general I don't like that being a strategy going forward of moving the

The negative enforcement thing was more about the idea of extending the sale (the other proposal). I think it's very problematic if we don't respect the deadlines we set. For example, if I say "you

I don't like extending sales deadlines as I think it becomes a negative enforcement loop that leads people to think "let's just wait until they extend it" so I can't support extending it. I also

They go back to the DAO. I guess we could have a proposal to burn them or do something else with them.

Hey Jimmy I followed up in the treasurer room with you.

We've been pretty spotty with treasurer coverage since this started. Previously we voted to expand it to 14 treasurers and added 3 new treasurers at that time. It seemed like people were fine with that.

I'm not appointing them (that's why we're voting) and didn't even select the names myself. They were all recommended to me as good candidates to put forth to the community. We have weekly meetings that

geeee geeee

It's crazy to think how long we've all been a part of this community. Congrats on 8 years!

The DAO has quite a bit of HBD and HIVE that's all referenced in the proposal. I think it would be prudent that we push for more DEC sinks as any may be released to offset sell pressure.

No offense taken... I'm not working with their lawyers. The only thing they are talking to their lawyers about (well as it pertains to this and that I'm aware of) is whether or not the DAO as a decentralized

DAO assets: There is no yearly repayment schedule, there's a total repayment amount which relates to one of the core problems that the company is working to address. They don't have steady/diversified

20% is what's being offered, I suppose the DAO could try to negotiate more favorable terms if it would like to do so. Keep in mind after 20% there's a 50/50 rev split so assuming we're repaid it would

The same accounting applies on both ends. When the next core set and what that cycle looks like is up to the DAO to decide. I've shared my thoughts, others may feel differently. I don't need things to

Code, art, website design is all IP. Not exactly a spend if it's being returned, more of a loan or investment on the DAO's behalf, all of which have been favorable to us in the past (we've done some smaller

The company is the one currently exploring the legality of it with their lawyers and why there's a blank space to include a link to the agreement for everyone to read once it's approved. One of the main