OK. THANKS FOR POSTING THIS AS IT HELPS ME UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION AND I FIND IT ACCEPTABLE.

So what was the reason to never fund @SeedSigner ?

Excellent and commendable as always. Thanks.

Freedom to invent is basic freedom .. no one can take it away no matter what .. Other two are - freedom to exchange and freedom to express .. The problem is exchange wants stability while "invent" worships change .. so .. conficts are inevitable .. just take them with a stride for things must happen the way they happen .. and its all good for #Bitcoin ..

Why you didn’t give me a hug dude? 😔

View quoted note → So none of the board members has veto right? Given there is quite some sponsorship relation between board members, I imagine that those on the receiving end care a lot about those sponsors' opinions. Are these votes at least secret? If not, I see a huge dependency issues there.

You do you man. It can be seen as a bit centralized to some since you are providing such a big funding footprint, but it's better than many who choose to not help at all. I give out Sats with everything I have built for Nostr, yet ask for nothing (nor grants) in return. Is this ideal? No. Will I go broke? Maybe someday. I'm not building clients just Nostr user experiences and providing media content that would pull in others with different interests so it rarely falls under funding radars or criteria here anyway. I just do it because I see a void that needs to be filled. Once I see no one needs it anymore, I'll stop. Seen it plenty of times over the last 30 years online.

Thank you for taking the time to answer questions. In your role as a board member of opensats, what is your goal for the development of Nostr? Who do you believe you are accoutnable to? In your role as a managing partner of Ten31, what is your goal for the developement of Primal? In this role, who are you accountable to? Do you believe that these two roles are free from any overlap, or conflicts of interest? If not, why? Lastly, do you think that being a managing patner of a VC firm may have a dampening effect on criticism from other developers who receive grants from opoensats, who are not aligned with the methods/development/design of Primal? Once again, thank you for taking the time to discuss this with the community.

Some suggestions of expanding the funding ecosystem of Nostr. (This is not for OpenSats or Odell, but for all). 1. Explore equity crowdfunding that enable users to own equity of the company. This will speed up early stages and users can help devs grow the business 2. OpenSats to expand individual funding into modular system. Like how designers are funded to assist many devs, also fund PR and comms, marketing etc to assist multiple devs. This are diff modules of a startup to make the outcome more complete. 3. Setup incubation / accelerator : Devs here are not entrepreneurs (yet) and don’t fully understand market penetration, financial plans and growth, user engagements etc (yet). This is common for any tech person who starts a startup. They need different help 4. Fund receivers to provide ROI from time to time based on funding - this will help everyone understand how the funds were maximised. This opens up transparency for both funders like OpenSats and HRF and for fund receivers. And will be an attractive factor for users, angels who want to invest large amount onto devs. 5. There are many types of funding models - anyone can create create this and implement this. To keep yelling at OpenSats is not going to make much diff only because the devs here are plenty and the market is wanting a wider funding ecosystem. Whatever is happening here is natural growth and a good thing. On a side note : 1. It’s good to expand funding ecosystem. There are no disbenefits. 2. Bootstrap means using profit to reinvest into r&d and at early stages there are little / no profit so it’s a slow slow process. Having funds expedites the build. 3. Break even won’t happen tmr or this year or next year (in case anyone is wondering). 4. Market penetration is important. Nostr has only teased the market and not gone head in. 5. A lot complain why users don’t want to pay for what they build. This is likely because users don’t know what you built or don’t see a value to it. I once read somewhere that entrepreneurs jump off a cliff and builds a plane on their way down. This is true. Good luck all !

WHY THE USE OF CAPITAL LETTERS?

It's an annoying schtick of his

Matt I love you but I seriously do not buy the 5 of 9 thing. You have people on the board with assertive personalities/expertise in certain areas where they’ll almost certainly hold the majority of the sway if there’s disagreement. It’s not a good look to have people with so many intertwining business interests and if I were you I’d find someone virtuous to replace me and step aside. I know it’s a challenge but it’s best for bitcoin and ultimately for you imo. I.e. fewer NVK and Odell’s (assertive businessmen with numerous intertangling business interests) more Nifty’s (open source dev more in it for purely the tech). You’re a great entrepreneur but that should be your focus and the bias you get from that leaves many like myself skeptical. Please consider this honest feedback sent with love. Onward.

Sovereign individuals freely donating to an organization that funds projects that they want funded. If anyone has a better model, then implement it or donate your money to someone who does.

I have a question. If Opensats receives substantial funds to funnel into dev projects (and the fact that it is 100% passthrough is laudable), the Opensats board will become a powerful entity in the Bitcoin world. Everyone knows that power corrupts. Have you thought about a mechanism to limit this power? Why have 9 permanent board members?

wait, you use apple? 💔

Respect

Compliance Is Defiance®