You are attacking again! Thank you for confirming me!
You havent answered anything.
Also showing some screenshots of reviews that one guy could write using multiple account (all at the same time and with the same text patterns at usernames) only strengthens my point of view.
So thanks again!
All these comments are made in the same time (4 months ago), again fishy to me.
I am being only careful here.
Since you have tested it @GreyFox maybe it is worth it. I havenāt and I do not run any web page needing such an app but it could serve our coin. I await for more peopleās feedback before I make my vote. But there are only 12 minutes left till the end of voting and I feel such an expense should have more people expressing their opinion on this.
I would be in favor for any future big proposal to:
Iām confused - which vote is open in this proposal?
We need much more information on this EzDefi before releasing 20million BTCZ.
We also need MUCH more participation from community to release this.
I absolutely love the exposure we could get from having a working plugin integrated with all these platforms, but this is an extremely large sum and just from the comments:
I love the much needed exposure into the market but overall its expensive, we have no details of how sustainable this company is, how much support we will get, this presentation of the proposal seemed confusing.
I donāt see it as passing either, we need 70% in accordance to the community paper. The community needs to ask more questions.
EDIT: I want to also elaborate @GreyFox is doing what he can to keep project moving and momentum and I appreciate it and I"m sure others do also - but we need as much fairness, clarity, and we need to set our egos aside. If we want to lead we need to encourage discussion and avoid bickering - itās unprofessional. Iām not saying @Greyfox did or didnāt do this, but this thread caused a lot of community unrest that was much different from meaningful discussion.
thanks @cryptorex
finally the first technical question that arrive here:
pity that they arrived a little late. The vote is over and the āyesā have not reached 70% of the vote, which means that the community is not interested in being in online stores. I will respect the community.
yes monobody becouse i thinked that was urgent the ezdefi and not the money for the managers. but i writed in the proposal āI hope that with the demo this time you can get a quick idea of the opportunity. Vote yes if you want to integrate btcz into EzDefi. I put 10 days for the vote because I donāt want the prices to rise again. If you think it is wrong and contrary to the principles of the community just reply to the post and I will increase the time.ā
see you
ps. you can see that 743 installation are make itā¦ the problem is always the usual. people put more negative than positive comments. so the fact of not seeing any negative comment in 743 installations makes me think. but itās useless to keep talking about it. the community already choose.
I apologize to everyone but I cannot understand why so many stories and why everything is being done this way, it seems that we are not using reason here. Do all proposals have to pass? Why does everything seem to move so fast?
I donāt understand why so many stories when these guys try to do something for btcz. I support greyfox and vandar in everything because they spend more time here than you and me. my vote is yours
Ok wins 2 Milion and 34 milions whit the same votes. So i think Is correct do a medium
34+2/2= 18 Milion
18/5 managers= 3.6 milions at managers (for 6 mounths)
I think Is correct Also becouse the last votation less of 10 and 34 were the Wins. So a part of the community dont want spend and another want. I think the Truth Is in the middle.
Of course managers donāt have to spend it ( Or can spend only part of it). at the end of their work tell how they changed them and how they spent them
@gilardh @Nucashmining @Monobody @VandarGR @Rokmikuz
Please managers, send us your wallet and good luck!
Hello.
Based on the above results I think the fairest solution is taking the mean of all participants to the votation.
By doing so, we have (4 * 2 + 10 * 3 + 12 * 2 + 6 + 4 * 34 + 21 + 25) / 16 = 15.625 M for all managers,
which means that each manager could get 3.125 M (15.625 / 5) for 6 months.
However, there were 3 people who picked two numbers.
So and to be really fair, we should get the mean of each one of these 3 first and then calculate the new mean of all participants.
Based on that we have:
(((12 + 34) / 2) + ( 2 + 21 ) / 2) + ((6 + 34) / 2) + 25 + (2 * 34) + 12 + (3 * 10) + (3 * 2)) / 13 = 15.03 ~ 15 M for all managers
and 15 / 5 = 3 M for each one of them.
I concur. Sound legit to me and I would be in favor of such solution.
then if we have to be really honest. since this is the second vote, and some members of the community did not vote here while they voted in the other, we should also take their votes and integrate them into it. and the average is much higher. the president didnt apply the veto to the other proposal, but it was my concern to give a more option. some may not have re-voted because they had done so before. i dont know that. I think 18 was a fair compromise with respect for the whole community and not just those who voted this time.
but if you want to oust the votes of people like @Oduvanchik (a historical member of this community) that voted 24milion only for give less to the managersā¦ ok, i dont have problem, and i m not manager.
I think youāre counting without caring the others to lower the result, and I donāt think itās correct. but if even @Monobody (whoās a manager) gives you reason. for me, letās do as you like 
ok @Monobody request how right you think it is. No problem.
please managers share to cryptorex or to monobody yours wallet.
thanks
You just cannot accept another opinion, dont you?
OK! So and to be complete honest this votation has to be cancelled because you arbitrarily split the procedure at two and gave the opportunity to some people to vote 2 times against others that picked only 1 number.
Also and about the previous votation, you picked again some numbers (14, 24, 34, 44 M etc) complete out of nothing based only at your YOUR own mind set (NOT communityās) and put people to vote.
And why you picked 14 and not 15? Why not 16? Or why not any other number between 14 and 24? And why you picked 24 or 34 as other options? Why not other numbers? And why you set a range (less than 10) while every other options is just a number?
Can you answer these questionsā¦? Can you answer based on something objective (such as maths) and not only your opinion?
If you wanted to conduct such a procedure in a fair for the community and the participants way, you should first create a votation based on ranges of numbers such as [0, 5], (5, 10], (10, 15], ā¦ , (45, 50] etc. or (0,10], (10, 20], ā¦, (40.50] and then get the range that people voted mostly and set another votation with options picked exactly from this range. The option that will get the most votes will represent the number of BTCZs the manager will split.
Of course there could be other fair options too. For example take the first 2 most voted ranges from the first votation and create another votation with available options picked from these ranges (without splitting the voting procedure in 2 as you did). The final (magic) number could be the mean of all the participantsā picks as proposed earlier.
Surely there could be other fair options too. I challenge you to find one and propose it here in order for the community to know others options too if similar situations arise at the future.
Dont forget though! A fair solution (at least in mathematical problems such as this one) is a solution that is objective and based on maths. Everything else (someoneās opinion and just because he tells so) is subjective and could be considered as an attempt for manipulation. And this is something that our community doesnt need.
Instead a community like ours which is based in fairness should also take desicions based on the most fairest way. And this is the only way for our community to thrive and multiple through the next decades. Fairness gives endurance! And endurance multiples awareness!
forgive me, but on the basis of oneās own mentality proposals are made and numbers are chosen.
the community then votes on whether or not it is. this happened for example when it was decided to give 800k to the first managers. the community did not have to choose how much (and when the community decides it votes by swathes). one from an idea and some options. itās normal like that.
I havenāt told people to vote several times. I donāt know why they did it. maybe to support 1 instead of another. I donāt know. ask them.
about the choice of votes to consider you have already chosen. I donāt have to propose anything. 3 million to managers as you like.
I guess this passed. I dont know how it passed caused there were no choice for voting with āNoā, could say forced votesā¦
But I was around at that time and I remember our Managers and Coders all were gifted including me.
So that is why I didnt voted at all as i guess others neighter.
Lets say its done by goodness.
They all working hard still for no payment so they deserved.
Closed topic.
