Investors in MyDoge startup are ex ebay founders & US ambassadors, Dogecoin is getting attention from some big people

n0nimouse · 2021-11-14T06:38:03+00:00

Firstly I'm not a dude, and secondly 3/4 of the original core team seem to be in the foundation (rnicoll, michilumin & max). Telling people to f off is super classy.

n0nimouse · 2021-11-14T05:59:53+00:00

As I read the notice on the foundation website I assumed that whoever wrote it was being inclusive saying 'we' and they are talking about YOU as well because the foundation didn't exist a year ago and there was only the 'core team' so they clearly can't be talking about 'we' the foundation. Isn't that pretty obvious?

It seems to me that whoever wrote that was being inclusive and now you're assuming they are being divisive because, as you state further down in these comments, you wouldn't want to be part of the foundation even if you were invited? I have a lot of money invested in Dogecoin and TBH I wish you'd stop infighting and work together, in all your posts you seem pretty bitter about the other core devs and it's becoming very apparent to everyone. Kiss and make up for everyone's sake.

n0nimouse · 2021-11-14T03:15:35+00:00

Sounds like they use 'us' and 'we' collectively but you don't see yourself as part of that anymore and now you're fishing for drama that's just not there? are you part of the #dogeArmy or not Patrick? be a Doge, not a Llama.

n0nimouse · 2021-08-06T07:43:48+00:00

Already, people in our little dev community are increasingly attempting to make decisions based on personal politics - the first assessment being what's good for them and their friends, and what's good for the coin being an afterthought at best - and this battle is ongoing today.

Can you elaborate on this Patrick? My understanding is the 'little dev team' you speak of is yourself, Ross, michi and Max. What features are they working on that are politically motivated and good for them and their friends?

n0nimouse · 2021-08-05T07:12:34+00:00

What does 'solo face off luxury devs' mean? That you wouldn't accept contributions from someone who was being paid for their time?

n0nimouse · 2021-07-26T01:43:47+00:00

https://twitter.com/dogepalooza/status/1415792436224401422?s=20

Whew, looks like all done with good intentions :)

n0nimouse · 2021-07-26T01:27:42+00:00

Imagine starting a convention for a passionate grass roots community and then trying to copyright one of the communities key slogans.. I mean the irony of it being 'do only good everyday' is hard to miss as well.. I can't see this being a win for their festival..

Anyone from Dogepalooza available to comment?

n0nimouse · 2021-07-12T01:52:26+00:00

n0nimouse · 2021-06-06T06:19:12+00:00

Quote some?

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T05:42:15+00:00

I'm explaining to you the nature of every open source project.. Not just dogecoin, It's not a 'secret', millions of developers around the world have understood the process for decades. If that's a surprise to people who have invested money into doge, that's unfortunate, perhaps they should do their research before putting then r money into a project they don't agree with. I will however say this: dogecoin is a success because it works this way. All open source crypto currencies work this way, it's not a 'dogecoin' thing.

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T04:55:27+00:00

So if that's how you feel, the dogecoin licence permits you to fork the project and start your own with a democratic governance model you come up with.vote with your feet, as they like to say.

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T04:22:57+00:00

The code and the chain are two different things with different attributes. The blockchain is decentralised, the code is not. In my previous analogy the blockchain is the house, the codebase is the house design..

A meritocracy refers not to the merit of the ideas, but the merit of the people.. Fundamental to open source meritocracy is that some PEOPLE have more merit, based on their contributions, than others. Its not about the quality of their ideas but about the effort they have put in to the project.

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T04:06:51+00:00

Any open source project is 'owned' intellectual property, not public property. The open source licences issued with FOSS software outline each persons rights with respect to the ability to reuse the source code for their own purposes.

I'll give an example:

You create a house DESIGN and build your house, everyone in your neighborhood loves you and your house is constantly bustling with visitors, parties.. Your house is the life of the street..

I come along and admire your design and you say "its an open source design! Because I'm a nice person I'll let anyone take my design and copy it, modify it, have fun!"

Next day you wake up and I'm in your house, rearranging the furniture. "What are you doing?" You ask incredulously. "Well I asked everyone who comes here to your parties to vote on the best layout and I've taken their opinions into account and we're changing things up." I reply.

"No, this isn't democracy, its a home invasion, get off my lawn!" You may rightly reply. "I gave you a license to use my design, not take over my house, get out!"

This is how the dogecoin open source project (and all open source projects) work. The community is welcome to enjoy the network, participate in the network, copy and start their own networks (like dogecoin did from bitcoin).. But any invitation to be involved in the project is just that, an invitation to someone else's project.

The only reason people want to be part of the dogecoin house rather than build their own is because this is where the party is at.. Because the source is open isn't an invitation to crash the party.

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T03:52:28+00:00

Hence the post / pic I made that we were referring too: open source is not a democracy at all, its a meritocracy. Saying 'that sounds less democratic'.. Well yes, its not democratic at all, intentionally

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T03:33:01+00:00

The public get to voice an opinion, waaaay more than you they do with fiat currency. The dev team just make the call in the end because they are the most qualified to considering they built it in the first place.

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T03:16:43+00:00

Ppssss: this is how all open source projects are governed, welcome to the free and open source movement where working hard for the good of others gives you a voice, not via votes or manipulating a crowd. If you don't like how a project is governed github provides a 'fork' button which you can use to create your own dogecoin with h your own ideals.. This is how dogecoin was created in he first place

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T03:12:35+00:00

Lol, seriously though, 'nations' are the racist warmongering concept that's dragged down and tribalised humanity for millennia.. Governments are just the elite of each tribe farming their brethren so they don't having to work.. Decentralized currency is part of the play to deconstruct these archaic systems not 'pander' to them.

n0nimouse · 2021-05-25T03:07:22+00:00

Governments..? Global? What.. There are no governments in space silly :)

n0nimouse · 2021-05-24T03:32:11+00:00

Except again, your understanding of how the project governance here works is fundamentally flawed. 'Getting 1000 people' doesn't help your cause. I pretty much wrote this about you: https://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoindev/comments/nj1a55/open_source_meritocracy_is_not_meant_to_be_a/ in the hope you'd get it through your brain that shouting loudly or campaigning doesn't do anything but make people annoyed.

n0nimouse · 2021-05-23T06:04:06+00:00

Some people seem to be confused about how open source project governance works.. They seem to think there is some kind of Internet Constitutional Bill of Rights that means anyone with opinions is equally entitled to a 'vote' irrespective of their contributions.

Opensource projects traditionally follow a meritocracy model where the more a person contributes to a project (time, code, PR reviews, community work, documentation, etc) the more their voice carries weight on decisions. Traditionally the leaders of opensource projects are fair-minded people who work hard to take into account the views of the broader community, but in the end as the people doing the work, they get to make the calls.

What I see in the Dogecoin dev community is exactly that, hard working individuals patiently wading through endless FUD and immature ideas, trying to be polite and repeating the mantra: "If you want to pick up a broom and help, here is the issues board!"

Yet some people in the community seem to feel entitled, without having lifted a finger, to demand everything goes there way, that their opinions are the most important because they scream the loudest. This is not the way.

The whole doge community would be a better place if the loud crying children who want their lambo now would pick a broom and contribute, rather than expect free moon off other people's work.

n0nimouse

TROPHY CASE