Internet Computer Association

DFINITY Foundation

ICP Maximalist Network

cycledao.xyz

ICDevs.org



# 3.1 Recap on DFINITY Foundation"s vote on proposal #52564

![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPdEqNhUcAAzBzp?format=jpg&name=large)
It looks like DFINITY and ICPMN and cycledao.xyz and dev.org have downvoted the #52564 proposal on the grounds that DFINITY believes that the proposal does not inspire a direction or dialogue to move the IC forward without a clear goal. So I would like to ask why you voted "yes" to the [#46398](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/46398) proposal [#46547](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/46547) proposal [#46700](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/46700) proposal [#46958](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/46985) proposal [#47098](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/47098) proposal [#47246](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/47246) proposal [#47394](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/47394) proposal? Is it just because the person who initiated the proposal is [ICPMN](https://twitter.com/BartlettWenzel?s=20&t=CVs0ync0NF20vy5s1J_FCg)? Is it because you discriminate against the Chinese community? Is it just because ICPMN made a relevant post in a centralized forum that caused community discussion? Why should the most advanced DAO in the world be discussed on a centralized platform? Do not you think it is good for your ICP to increase governance participation? Or do you think the ICP wik document is so well written that even kindergarten children can understand it so that my Chinese translation and video explanation are superfluous? the most advanced DAO in the world looks very inefficient and corrupt.

## It seems that some people simply do not realize that NNS is the most cost-effective way of spreading information in the world.
![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPdYqy2aMAEvLPz?format=png&name=900x900)
The "List of Known Neurons" looks a lot like EOS supernodes, and you have natural exclusivity. You should put your neuron id on your official website and you should put your neuron id in your twitter profile. You should advertise in your own community, not on the front of NNS. It is like threatening users: Hurry up and pick one from the list, or you will lose your money if you miss the motion proposal. Users should be able to judge who has contributed to the ICP. According to historical data and information disclosed by DFINITY, the voting weight of neurons in the "known neuron list" is 33%, and the highest participation rate of motion proposals is only 45%, which means that they can pass any proposal. Everyone should know how high the authority of NNS is. Dominic, do not you think this needs to change? It looks more centralized than SOL.

Those forced to follow oligarchs for gain you have better selection neurons: `12860062727199510685`

 ## Why should I explain the vote in the proposal
 
 From the analysis of the design of NNS, there are only four cases for a proposal
 
1.You think this proposal is beneficial to your locked ICP, you should vote "yes"
2.You think the proposal is not conducive to your locked ICP, you should "no"
3.If you think the proposal has no effect on your locked ICP, it means that you think this is a spam proposal and you should vote "no"
4.You do not know how the proposal will affect your locked ICP, you should vote "no" in order to avoid risks
 
 I do not actually care about 1 ICP required to vote at all, you shouldn not be limited to a motion proposal being executed or rejected, NNS is not only the world"s most cost-effective way to disseminate information, it is the world"s best community survey Way.
 
 # Finally, the goal of this proposal is to remove the list of known neurons in the NNS front-end
 
 #### ICP donation:6d139f4193f3c17d654afde57869ba8e53ee4e70141e3d0cd3f1bfe80c279ce3

-----

# 3.1关于DFINITY基金会对#52564提案投票的回顾

![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPdEqNhUcAAzBzp?format=jpg&name=large)
看起来DFINITY和ICPMN和cycledao.xyz和ICDevs.org对 #52564 提案投出了反投票，理由是DFINITY[认为](https://forum.dfinity.org/t/dfinity-foundations-voting-on-translation-of-how-to-create-an-nns-motion-proposal-52564/11847/2)该提案并没有激发方向或对话没有推动 IC 向前发展，没有一个目标。那么我想问你们为什么对[#46398](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/46398) 提案[#46547](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/46547)提案[#46700](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/46700)提案[#46958](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/46958)提案[#47098](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/47089)提案[#47246](https://dashboard.internetcomputer.org/proposal/47246)提案47394提案投出了"yes"？难道只是因为发起提案的人是[ICPMN](https://twitter.com/BartlettWenzel?s=20&t=CVs0ync0NF20vy5s1J_FCg)？难道是因为您歧视中文社区？难道只是因为ICPMN在一个中心化论坛中发出的相关帖子引起了社区讨论？请问世界上最先进的DAO为什么要在中心化平台上进行讨论？您难道不认为提高治理参与度利于您的ICP吗？还是说你们认为ICP wik文档写的非常棒，幼儿园的小朋友也可以看懂以至于我做中文翻译和视频讲解就是画蛇添足吗？大裁缝，世界上最先进的DAO看起来非常低效与腐败。

# 看起来某些人根本没有意识到NNS是世界上最划算的信息传播途径。
![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FPdYqy2aMAEvLPz?format=png&name=900x900)
“已知神经元列表”看起来很像EOS的超级节点，你们具有天然的排他性。您应该把您的神经元id放在您的官网上，您应该把您的神经元id放在您的推特简介中。您应该去自己的社区宣传，而不是放在NNS前端，这就像在威胁用户：快点在列表中选一个，不然错过了动议提案就没有收益。用户应该有能力判断到底谁为ICP做出了贡献。根据历史数据和DFINITY所透露的信息可知"已知神经元"列表中的神经元的投票权重占比为33%，而动议提案的最高参与度不过45%，这意味它们可以通过任何一个提案。大裁缝，您应该知道NNS的权限有多高，您不认为这需要改变吗？它看起来比SOL更中心化。

 为了收益而被迫跟随寡头的人您有了更好的选择:`Neuron id: 12860062727199510685`

 ## 为什么我要在提案中对投票进行解释

 从NNS的设计来分析，对以一项提案来说无非就四种情况
 
 1.你认为该提案利于你所锁定的ICP，你应该投"yes"
 2.你认为该提案不利于你锁定的ICP，你应该"no"
 3.你认为该提案对你锁定的ICP没有影响，则表明你认为这是一个垃圾提案，你应该投"no"
 4.你不知道该提案对你锁定的ICP有什么影响，为了未知避免风险您应该投"no"
 
 实际上我根本不在乎投票所需的1个ICP，您不应该对动议提案的认知局限于被执行或被拒绝，NNS不仅是世界上最划算的信息传播途径，还是世界上最好的社区调查方式。
 
 # 最后，本提案的目标是删除已知神经元列表

 #### ICP捐赠:6d139f4193f3c17d654afde57869ba8e53ee4e70141e3d0cd3f1bfe80c279ce3




3.1 Recap on DFINITY Foundation"s vote on proposal #52564.双语