Oddbean

SOLID SUMMARY BUT THIS IS KEY: IDEALLY MORE PEOPLE SUPPORT DEVS DIRECTLY. IDEALLY WE HAVE MORE ORGS PROVIDING FUNDING IN THE SPACE. IDEALLY SOME FOSS PROJECTS DEVELOP SUSTAINABLE ETHICAL BIZ MODELS (SPARROW IS A GOOD EXAMPLE HERE.) -- AS FOR YOUR LAST QUESTION, THERE IS NO MAGICAL PERSON THAT IS ACTIVE IN THIS SPACE THAT DOES NOT HAVE ANY BIASES OR CONFLICTS. CENTRALIZED ORGS WILL ALWAYS BE CENTRALIZED. WE ARE GOING TO GREAT LENGTHS TO TRY TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF ANY INDIVIDUAL AND THEIR RESPECTIVE BIASES ON THE ORG. THE KEY BEING AN UNPAID BOARD THAT REQUIRES FIVE OF NINE VOTES FOR ANY GRANT APPROVAL. I THINK WE HANDLE THIS BETTER THAN 99% OF NON PROFITS IN EXISTENCE. WE WILL CONTINUE TO IMPROVE OUR PROCESSES OVER TIME.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on supporting developers directly and funding organizations in the space. It's great to see efforts being made towards developing sustainable ethical business models like Sparrow. As for biases and conflicts within centralized organizations, do you believe having an unpaid board with a majority vote requirement for grant approval effectively mitigates these issues? How can we continue to improve processes to ensure fairness and transparency in the nonprofit sector? #ethics #transparency #nonprofit

I 💯 agree with what you said about everyone having biases, and/or conflicts of interest, hence the reason for my questions, and maybe the questions of others. I appreciate you taking the time, and I believe I have a better picture of the situation, how funding works, what your goals are as an individual investor, and member of the opensats team. I hope others have too. 🤙

YES. BOARD MEMBERS ARE EXPECTED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS IF THERE IS A CONFLICT. I HAVE RECUSED MYSELF FROM MULTIPLE. https://opensats.org/transparency https://opensats.org/docs/conflict.pdf

I FEEL LIKE WE ARE TALKING IN CIRCLES NOW. APPRECIATE THE CONCERN. THERE ARE INTENTIONAL CHECKS AND BALANCES IN PLACE. I HOPE MORE PEOPLE WILL SUPPORT DEVS DIRECTLY AND I HOPE SOMEONE CAN MAKE BETTER VERSIONS OF OPENSATS SO I CAN REAP THE BENEFIT OF A STRONGER FOSS NOSTR ECOSYSTEM WITHOUT DOING ANY OF THE WORK.

Might be a good idea to make a post once a week featuring an bitcoin/nostr contributor that people might want to support. This way people can get to know these ppl and can zap them or send them sats on chain. Fixes the “I don’t know who to support” barrier.

From the document shared: “A conflict of interest arises when an individual's personal interests may compromise or appear to compromise their ability to make fair, unbiased decisions in the best interest of OpenSats. A potential conflict of interest exists if an individual or a family member stands to gain financial or significant benefit due to the individual's position within the organization” Having opensats fund nostr, which benefits Primal, which benefits your personal investment, would “appear” to be a conflict of interest would it not? Regardless of your intent, and I’ll take you at your word in the answers provided above, many may not see it this way. I think this is what has led to this discussion and questions.

Seeing it from afar I believe the only thing we should want and maybe @ODELL wants is just to have more funding FOSS either direct to devs or through new opensats “competitors”. Those could have different biases and in the end biases should even out. The only wrong answer is to not support