RE: SPS Governance Proposal - Contract Flowdesk for SPS Market Making Services
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
If we want to have something "just in case" we hit a bull, then I think we should spend as little money as possible to have that available option. That's why I was willing to accept 1 exchange as a compromise.
But going for 2 exchanges is ignoring the point that these have been a waste of money and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future. Its a vote that says for ONLY $18k MORE dollars (in addition to the $42k for one) we can have two tier 2 exchanges (instead of 1) providing NO VALUE until such time they MIGHT be useful when everything else is in line.
If the proposal is changed to 1 exchange and we put some fiscal discipline into our thought process then I wouldn't vote against it in deference to your point of view (and the others that think the same way). But if it stays as 2 exchanges, then I think we are not really serious in protecting the capital in the DAO and to me that's a big mistake.
I didn't vote wolf's proposal to save the DAO money because I don't think we should be risking $50k at this time on something speculative. I surely would rather have his attempt to grow his game (and thus ours) rather than repeat the same wasteful spending to 2nd tier exchanges that require payola for us to be listed.
And I also appreciate the dialogue Jimmy, I'm not mad at you or anyone who votes for it. My negativity for this is:
- to protect and preserve our capital and be fiscally responsible stewards of our capital
- distaste for payola in general
- we've already tried it and it didn't work.