Blockzero Citizenship Inclusive VS Exclusive - Do not create an echo chamber!

Dear Dash & Team,

I keep hearing the ‘Exclusive citizenship’ is being promoted with the idea of creating it more exclusive. If you want to create an echo chamber it will do you good, however, echo chambers limit growth and creativity. If you go down that path you’ll surely lose my interest.

I’m not sure why you’d think that this would really add to the quality of conversation. Interaction and creativity will explode by creating fewer hoops, not more.

I personally have been active in the forum/telegram on and off, listen to youtube videos, and the reason that I’m not going all-in is not my lack of time or capacity to add my creativity to one of the growing projects at Blockzero.

However, oftentimes, when community involvement is being proposed it comes with hoops, like the last marketing content proposal, which comes in the form of a competition. Why don’t you ask citizens to provide a sample of their past work instead of creating this idea that we now have to jump up and down to earn the ‘carrot’ (competition).

Time is valuable for everyone and if you truly want a decentralized community, and want to attract talent/time (lifeforce), you should probably stop treating this like a classroom where the team is the principal/teacher. The idea of wanting to create citizenship more exclusive would just bolster this cast system.

Let’s admit that I did take my time to foresee that ETH high transaction costs would limit FLASH before it launched & that some of us here advocated that layer-2 should have been a priority already and that waiting for optimism was a mistake. Now, yesterday a 90% vote on ‘I’m not using Flash because of fees’ just tells me again that you should not make this Blockzero forum more exclusive. You should perhaps value opinions that are not from within an echo chamber. Months of focus have been lost waiting for optimism & with this opening opportunity for competition to come in and copy the ‘Flash idea’…

Note: I say all of this with the utmost respect for all of the team, but I cannot be reacting in compliance with an echo chamber, so I need to speak my mind to make my thoughts valuable. Compare that to me not saying what I really think just so that I could earn your approval and hopefully get some extra XIO for my effort…?! You see, that does not work.

In the meantime, I will continue supporting (even after Flash trouble) & hopefully you reconsider that idea of making citizenship more exclusive & focus more on actually using the diversity of talent which is actually available if you can truly reach out to it.




Could you elaborate on how exactly exclusivity was communicated and in what ways? I think it would help to understand your points.

I was actually surprised to see this high number on the Twitter poll. And if possible, I would really appreciate if some stats can be made public. How much of the dropped Flash was never staked as in %tokens and %wallets?
And also the follow up: How do you intend to consider the given dream gas fee scenarios? Is interesting.

Hi Frank, with the idea of ‘exclusive citizenship’ I was referring to comments made by Zachery Dash in the youtube video which discussed the ‘Flash exploit’. Somewhere at the end, he discussed this idea where not everyone could easily become a citizen, but would have to jump over a number of hoops in order to get citizenship. (Hoops like , (invite only) being invited by different Blockzero members, or any other type of requirements. My response is with regards to that idea.

The idea being to improve quality of the members and to create a cult like desire to become Blockzero citizen. I heard him mention similar ideas a couple of months ago in a Youtube video and was kind of happy that this idea did not seem to get follow through. However, I was surprised to hear him come back to this.

Here you can see the stakingstats:
And here you can see the amount of stakers vs non stakers: FLASH Reports: Statistics | Blockzero Blockchain Explorer & Citizen Interface | BZ.TO

The current ETH fees which were predictable. I mean anyone could see that this was coming months back and they are now simply prohibitive. Months ago, the plans for a temporary L2 (layer 2) scaling solution were discussed. To be more precise, they were given the go-ahead. However, somewhere along the way it was decided to wait for a scaling solution based on optimistic rollups, however that tech is not ready yet. Meanwhile, the market is evolving quickly and waiting is not a good strategy. Now they are looking at Avalanche as a scaling solution and I think that is fair, however, my point is that Avalanche has been here for a couple of months , and XDAI is also a viable scaling solution, so why are we only now treating this more seriously. ( Xdai transactions are mere cents/per transcaction) (Avalanche a bit more expensive but feasible.

Thanks for clarifying. I am actually supporting this idea because referral invites give a personal note to the group an ensure somewhat ‘quality’. Limiting access, such as Clubhouse with restrictions on iO and invites is an example of how shortage can be an advantage for growth. When you express yourself with hoops and carrot it sounds to me like you have sentiments towards such incentive structures. I can understand this and would really appreciate if you can give alternatives that somehow help with the objective of attracting good citizens?

I am certain you are better informed on this then me.
But there are many posts in the forum where people expressed their concern or disappointment about L2. I believe it just was not possible to accomplish as planned. And as to the scaling alternatives, I guess this is connected to the necessity to launch Flashv2, fixing is often also an opportunity for improvement.

I don’t think it’s a good idea to create an exclusive citizenship. It opens the doors to having favoritism or having special benefits.