Yesterday @Ned put out a call for nominations to form a community foundation to help with the funding and development of The Steem Blockchain.

Nominations were taking privately and publicly and the following are the nominees so far.

@crimsonclad, @aggroed, @whatsup, @upheaver, @llfarms, @howo, @starkerz, @elear, @steemcafe, @gargon, @thecryptodrive, @pgarcgo, @bobinson, @reggaemuffin.

The most important goal of this organization is to be as open as possible and because of this all chat archives will be released here. We also are working on a home for this organization that will be open to the public.

Open Call For Nominations

This is about the community and while some public nominations were asked for, we only felt it was right to open up these to the entire community using the blockchain itself.

Please read this document and nominate an individual you feel would be a good representative in the comments below.

All the information up to this point is listed below, and will continued to be done in the days to come. There will be no secrets, its all here.

aggroed [6:00 PM]
joined #community-governance along with crimsonclad.

aggroed [6:00 PM]
set the channel purpose: Ned made progress on a foundation. We're here to discuss.

whatsup [6:00 PM]
joined #community-governance by invitation from aggroed, along with 11 others.

aggroed [6:01 PM]
@Ned For now I've started by inviting everyone to this slack. Only one who doesn't currently have an invite that has been nominated from what I saw was steemcafe
apparently they aren't in this slack
@gandalf

slackbot [6:03 PM]
Ok! I've invited @gandalf to this channel.

gandalf [6:03 PM]
joined #community-governance by invitation from aggroed.

aggroed [6:05 PM]
Current list of all "nominees" Crim, agg, whatsup, llfarms, upheaver, howo, starkerz, elear, steemcafe, gargon, cryptodrive, pgarcgo, bobinson, muffin

llfarms [6:06 PM]
I have his phone number as he was at the Tron conference and could get an email if needed. Someone might want to reach out to see if he would be interested though first, as I’m not entirely sure he would be.

crimsonclad [6:09 PM]
I'd like to broach the topic of ethical/conflicts of interests early that come with some of us currently being consensus witnesses and what that looks like in relation to what we're looking to create here. I can see points both for and against that are important to me, and I think that's one I'd certainly like a range of opinions on from all of you :slightly_smiling_face:

aggroed [6:09 PM]
I would want to know more about what Ned has in mind before assuming it's a conflict of interest

crimsonclad [6:13 PM]
That's kind of what I'm asking about, no? I didn't assume, but I like to think these things through thoroughly, even as potentials.

Ned [6:15 PM]
Aggroed -- I'm completely open to the governance structures
And don't want to be in the way whatsoever

Anyone who is nominated, we'll get their emails and begin deliberating and finding one or more of the folks to be point person to finish setting up a foundation. I'd be happy to include you!

My plan is to fund it through inception -> then it's potential is to grow into an non-profit, mission oriented organization for Steem, that can flexibly add more to its doings as it raises more funds and shows success

Ned [2:56 PM]
A few months ago, Steemit made significant progress setting up a Foundation to support Steem sustainability.

Given the moment, it makes sense to find a person or two to fund and lead this. Is there anyone that comes to mind for you from the Steem community to lead this?

The general idea is hand the project to someone who will set up a Foundation governance that advances Steem, is transaparent, accountable -- is flexible for adopting more responsibilities as it grows. Take it through launch then launch fundraising efforts -- take it into actually executing given the funds it receives -- to which we would plan to donate a multiple of other initial donations
It is often the person most reluctant who would be best to lead
However, I believe the task should be manageable - we have contracted an organization that specializes in setting up >Foundations and can manage to the goals
(edited)
Somehow, it would be great to get the initial nominated group to deliberate in their own channel, with comms appearing publicly
The funding I'm committed to is the initialization funding
I expect once it is initialized that there will be a subsequent fundraiser for year one (edited)
Based on fundraising goals, I expect it would attempt certain initiatives (edited)
I expect it will raise significant funding for year one (at least), and am committed to making that happen
Once an accountable structure is set up, I'm very optimistic is will become logical to put more responsibilities in this org
Can we publish this channel publicly?
Please :slightly_smiling_face:
I don't want any seats in the org for myself or Steemit, Inc folks, btw - for clear corporate distinctions

aggroed [6:20 PM]
I'm completely open to publishing it openly. It might be easier to host in PALnet considering discord can allow a role where anyone in here can type and view where as everyone else can just view

thecryptodrive [6:21 PM]
I'm fine with it being public as well, does Slack not have a read only mode?

llfarms [6:21 PM]
I believe he means public to the community

aggroed [6:21 PM]
^

Ned [6:21 PM]
^

llfarms [6:21 PM]
Posts could be made with full transcript
Channel open for all to see

Ned [6:22 PM]
Could someone be in charge of posting transcripts?

llfarms [6:22 PM]
Yes, that should be easy
What account would we want to post them on?

aggroed [6:22 PM]
tbd

llfarms [6:22 PM]
Also, sent steemcafe’s email to you aggroed
Ok

Ned [6:22 PM]
I'd so go ahead and choose one

aggroed [6:22 PM]
I forwarded to ned

Ned [6:23 PM]
I am stepping out of the way now
Please appoint a leader

aggroed [6:23 PM]
Ned do you have a scope in mind of what the foundation should cover?

Ned [6:23 PM]
I will be here for support

aggroed [6:23 PM]
or a broad objective?

Ned [6:23 PM]

The general idea is hand the project to someone who will set up a Foundation governance that advances Steem, is transaparent, accountable -- is flexible for adopting more responsibilities as it grows. Take it through launch then launch fundraising efforts -- take it into actually executing given the funds it receives -- to which we would plan to donate a multiple of other initial donations
A foundation that can handle as little as marketing campaigns with flexibility to grow to handle GitHub repos and engineering outsourcing

aggroed [6:24 PM]
are you open to creating a process for delegations from misterdelegation under this group?

Ned [6:25 PM]
I would suggest something like that be baked in to be manage-able from the way the Foundation is setup. Whether that needs to be in the by laws, I'm not sure; I'm not sure it's not too specific. A process for incorporating a process like that seems adviseable, (edited)
Short answer, yes.

aggroed [6:27 PM]
Do you have an initial budget in mind that would come from Steemit to support this initiative?

Ned [6:28 PM]
The initia lbudget is only to setup the organization
That will cost between two and 15 thousand dollars

llfarms [6:28 PM]
Before appointing a leader, we need to contact all nominees as many are not present here currently. Set up a chat, and hash out some details including conflict of interest brought up by Crim. We also need to decide if nominees are the only ones involved or if it should be opened up more in the sake of transparency and other all inclusion.

thecryptodrive [6:29 PM]
So where would the rest of the funding come from, the community can't afford to fund such an organisation imo.

Ned [6:29 PM]
I have a series of communications, contacts and setup documents to share with the group once it is somewhat organized with co-leaders or leader, etc

Ned [6:31 PM]
replied to a thread:
There needs to be a fundraising exercise once the organization is formed. I am committed to making that substantial for the first year, through some commitment later to a multiple of funds received for certain fundraising thresholds. This group must be willing to launch a fundraising campaign for this to work.View newer replies

crimsonclad [6:31 PM]
I don't even suggest it's the only or even a full conflict of interest~ but we have brains here that have so many valuable perspectives. There is nothing more important to me than doing right by steem so you may have to bear with me as I look at angles and ramifications of my (and others) actions and abilities to make sure that's what's achieved. It's not meant to slow down or confuse the process, but it is important to me.

aggroed [6:32 PM]
Well, hearing more from Ned now makes it easier to see what or what not might be a conflict. I think it's a good convo.

llfarms [6:32 PM]
And I think that sort of thought process is exactly how we need to approach this Crim, completely agree.

aggroed [6:33 PM]
I know you were looking at this a lot a year ago, did you see anything along the lines of technology grants that might be able to support a non-prof like this?

Ned [6:34 PM]
^ seems worth creating a role for someone to look into (edited)
Ok, I believe I need to help get this to one more step

aggroed [6:35 PM]
yeah, grant writer seems an imperative

Ned [6:35 PM]
The nomiated group should accept anymore nominees after soliciting from the first transcript post

thecryptodrive [6:35 PM]
What are the initial thoughts, operating the foundation as a trust with the Steem network as beneficiary or as a DAC?

Ned [6:35 PM]
After that, the nominee group should nominate each other for two co-leader positions
The co-leaders shall be blessed by the group to pull the foundation to fruition (edited)

thecryptodrive [6:36 PM]
I would even say three incase of deadlock

Ned [6:36 PM]
That works IMV
Who can volunteer for the first transcript post?

llfarms [6:37 PM]
I can do it once we decide on an account. Then can ask for nominations and collect

crimsonclad [6:37 PM]
Probably best to make one fresh, easily enough.

llfarms [6:37 PM]
Yes, just need a name

thecryptodrive [6:38 PM]
first order of business should be to name the foundation and account

aggroed [6:38 PM]
ok, Ned, I think we have enough to start

llfarms [6:38 PM]
Thank you

aggroed [6:39 PM]
I'd suggest we talk about Crim's comment about Witnesses and conflicts before going on
we have a lot of witnesses in this group

Ned [6:39 PM]
That perceived issue could get resolved through the next round of nominations

llfarms [6:40 PM]
I don’t know that being a witness is a conflict of interest as it’s an elected official who is vested in the platform, but I know some would disagree.
True

Ned [6:40 PM]
There also should be rotating board seats in the by laws, if not some seat reserved for STEEM-based votes, or some such

thecryptodrive [6:40 PM]
Almost all, if we remove them we have almost no one left and imo the consensus witnesses are in the position they are in because of their commitment to Steem. (edited)
i would say annual elections

llfarms [6:41 PM]
It needs to be balanced with witness and community members then (edited)

thecryptodrive [6:41 PM]
for the board (greater community vote) and then the board elects leadership

aggroed [6:41 PM]
especially because some of this stuff will involve keys I think it needs to be a term that's at least a year

Ned [6:41 PM]
Lawyers can be contracted to help handle keys

llfarms [6:42 PM]
Yes, as a “non witness”.. some people aren’t capable of doing any of this.

thecryptodrive [6:42 PM]
same as a body corporate trust, once elected, trustees nominate chair and vice-chair usually

crimsonclad [6:42 PM]
Right. As I said, I'm not even married to the idea it's a conflict of interest that means you can't hold a position. Just one that is kept in the backs of our minds as we look at how we want to build, spend, and be transparent. Looking at the questions and concerns people may have early in the process means you can create a structure that addresses them early to be as transparent and representative of the community as possible.

aggroed [6:43 PM]
I guess my thought on the conflict is that I don't perceive one especially if Steemit isn't sitting on it.
that wouldn't immediately cause one, but I think it makes it slimmer

llfarms [6:43 PM]
Agreed, and opening it up to the community makes it inclusive and balances it.
As was said though, next round of nominations could make this issue void.

Ned [6:44 PM]
Let's choose a name, can be temporary and move fwd

aggroed [6:44 PM]
I guess my main thought is that it doesn't matter if I think it's a conflict or not people will vote witnesses based on if they perceive it as a conflict

Ned [6:44 PM]
steem research foundation was a working title we had months ago
I believe we could do better

aggroed [6:45 PM]
I guess I ultimately believe the risk sits on teh witness

thecryptodrive [6:45 PM]
it has to fit a steem account length too
steemfoundation is taken unfortunately
unless steem.foundation

aggroed [6:46 PM]
Having formed a group before and got bitten by it before I would argue the first piece of business is actually settng community guidelines

llfarms [6:46 PM]
Not without everyone here

Ned [6:46 PM]
We need to solicit more member before setting organization guidelines, maybe community guidelines is differen
Agree, we need everyone here

thecryptodrive [6:46 PM]
steem.foundation is taken

llfarms [6:46 PM]
Pick a name, make a post then guidelines later

aggroed [6:47 PM]
determining what's public what's not, and some interim thoughts on a plan of how others get involved
determing acceptable behavior
I don't think it's controversial now

Ned [6:47 PM]
Let that occur with nominations of leadership
IMV for greatest inclusion

llfarms [6:48 PM]
Yes, which when opening up for “nominations” we do need an idea of what we are looking for. But I guess that could be worked out internally if it’s an issue after.

aggroed [6:48 PM]
Especially when involving the public and accepting any and all nominations as we currently do I think it's incredibly imporant this group has community standards, at least initial ones

Ned [6:48 PM]
st.eemfoundation
steem-foundation

llfarms [6:49 PM]
Second one

thecryptodrive [6:49 PM]
steem-insitute

aggroed [6:49 PM]
institute is a good word

thecryptodrive [6:50 PM]
https://steemd.com/@steem-foundation this is taken

Ned [6:50 PM]
That works IMV

thecryptodrive [6:50 PM]
place thumbs up or down on steem-institute
next thing we need to approve how the account will be created and how keys will be handled initially

Ned [6:52 PM]
I would trust whoever here registers it for the time being

aggroed [6:52 PM]
I'm not sure we have either a quorum (1/2) or half the voters in favor of it

llfarms [6:52 PM]
Well, I think the account will just be for communication at this point. No funds are involved

aggroed [6:52 PM]
it's 12+ Ned i think

llfarms [6:53 PM]
I’m fine with the name, even though I think foundation goes more inline with funding and what other blockchains do.

Ned [6:53 PM]
Steem Institute, non-profit foundation for the advancement of Steem

thecryptodrive [6:53 PM]
all the iterations of foundation are taken on chain

llfarms [6:53 PM]
But the name isn’t that important really, it’s what happens after

aggroed [6:53 PM]
Crim, you're probably the best at branding here. Any thoughts on the name?

llfarms [6:54 PM]
Well, when you say it like that.. it works
@crimsonclad

Ned [6:54 PM]
Let's quickly move to getting this transcript posted
llfarms, woud you?

crimsonclad [6:55 PM]
I'm thinking on it right now, but institute is a great start. Suggests education and exploration. (edited)

llfarms [6:55 PM]
Yes

Ned [6:55 PM]
Thank you
Do we have a second?

aggroed [6:55 PM]
second

thecryptodrive [6:55 PM]
ok are you guys happy to create the account?

whatsup [6:55 PM]
Why in PAL or something and not the blockchain

llfarms [6:55 PM]
I have an account credit available and will make the account

aggroed [6:55 PM]
cause you can't live chat on teh blockchain as easily

whatsup [6:55 PM]
We have a communication platform

llfarms [6:56 PM]
Share keys with whoever needs them

whatsup [6:56 PM]
and this is supposed to be a community fund

llfarms [6:56 PM]
We are working on putting this on the chain whatsup
That’s the goal

aggroed [6:56 PM]
I still think we need 2 more before steem-institute is good to go

thecryptodrive [6:56 PM]
@llfarms will you share the main key with a few of us in DM as redundancy incase something happens to you

crimsonclad [6:56 PM]
We're placing all transcripts onto the chain. I don't think the idea was ever to have the foundation operating out of any entity. (edited)

aggroed [6:57 PM]
it's also going to be hard to read because upvotes will take things out of chronological order

thecryptodrive [6:57 PM]
also we need to consider the recovery account, should be blocktrades or something neutral (edited)

crimsonclad [6:57 PM]
AFAIK that was a suggestion to put them there until this was done, but we're moving straight to doing this first. I see no reason to choose any existing discord or community.

thecryptodrive [6:57 PM]
i know how to change the recovery account if needed

upheaver [6:57 PM]
just caught up with the conversation here, so far so good

aggroed [6:58 PM]
still need 3 on steem-institute (if ned's not actually on this he shouldn't get a vote)
still good to know he supports though

upheaver [6:58 PM]
I like it

llfarms [6:58 PM]
@whatsup I’d like to hear from you

aggroed [6:59 PM]
scroll up and thumbs up please

thecryptodrive [6:59 PM]
@upheaver can you put a thumbs up

upheaver [7:00 PM]
I did in two places

whatsup [7:00 PM]
I'm fine with that
was just asking a question. :slightly_smiling_face:

aggroed [7:00 PM]
I need to get a post out about my show tonight, a witness forum next week, and before this even started I was putting a community forum together for Sunday Feb 3 at 1pm EST 1800 UTC as an open opportunity for anyone to contribute thoughts on what governance should/would look like. Any objections to posting this? (edited)

llfarms [7:01 PM]
Just wanted to be sure. The goal here from the beginning is to make this open and no more behind closed doors. I will make account, share keys and post transcript.

upheaver [7:01 PM]
no objections

aggroed [7:01 PM]

Steem Community Gathering

I want you to mark your calendars. At 1pm EST on Sunday Feb 3rd I'm going to host a community wide open forum. There's lots of ideas of community governance. I've been floating mine around, which I've called Steem Council, but there are others as well. I'm inviting anyone in the community that wants to share what they are working on, why it has merit, and why we should support it/ use it/ adopt it will be given a platform to share that.

upheaver [7:01 PM]
quick question, do we have any anonymous users in here?

crimsonclad [7:02 PM]
Do you mean, are our full names available on chain?

llfarms [7:02 PM]
Steeminstitute or Steem-institute?

thecryptodrive [7:02 PM]
I'm not anon

upheaver [7:02 PM]
not necessarily on chain, rather than known

aggroed [7:02 PM]
idk

thecryptodrive [7:02 PM]
steem-institute

whatsup [7:02 PM]
I don't know anyone's name nor do I care

llfarms [7:02 PM]
Ok I like that as well

thecryptodrive [7:02 PM]
without the dash is hard to read

crimsonclad [7:02 PM]
I prefer the dash, myself. Clearer.

thecryptodrive [7:03 PM]
plus https://steemd.com/@steeminstitute is taken

llfarms [7:03 PM]
Yes, easier to read. I’ll go with that

crimsonclad [7:03 PM]
I use my face and have introduced myself with my real name. If it became paramount, I would consider an on chain publication, since accountability matters.

llfarms [7:04 PM]
Real face/real first name.. if you look hard enough you can find my last, but I don’t broadcast that just for safety reasons.

crimsonclad [7:04 PM]
I've already had some problematic interactions, which have lead me to keep both my face and name off chain. It's more a safety and work/life line, but I'm not beholden to it if it becomes about more than me.

aggroed [7:05 PM]
Not keen on that being a requirement personally

crimsonclad [7:05 PM]
And with video outreach and in person steem business meetings, that ship is starting to sail anyways. But I do value trying to keep myself safe and my private life partially protected until such time as its completely necessary.

whatsup [7:05 PM]
It's not a criteria I would consider

thecryptodrive [7:06 PM]
I think anyone with active/owner key access should disclose their KYC to the attorneys, which can be kept confidential off-chain (edited)
posting and memo access no

upheaver [7:06 PM]
I would consider that any fund / governance model off-chain would require a level of publicity or at least shared identity in private between the group. Does not need to be public, but known to someone in case there are issues. Disclosure to attorneys would do. (edited)

aggroed [7:07 PM]
My initial guidelines would be-
no dishonesty of any kind
no stealing or destroying intellectual property
no harassment of individuals or groups of individuals

thecryptodrive [7:08 PM]
no theft or misappropriation of funds (edited)
no nepotistic preferences
"First do no harm"

upheaver [7:09 PM]
We can borrow "don't be evil" from Google, since they are not using it anymore

aggroed [7:10 PM]
I think that's good enough to get a safe start
still need 2 on steem-institute

crimsonclad [7:12 PM]
I'm absolutely fine with disclosing all of my details legally. My off chain preference comes from a couple of attempts at unwelcome contact that have sort of shaped my viewpoint here.

I would add a variation on a commitment to transparency in all communications and decisions, unless there is explicit reasoning for getting something done privately to ensure success and then posting timely logs as soon as possible. But that's not a good, short soundbite and may reach beyond personal conduct to committee conduct. (edited)

upheaver [7:13 PM]
sounds good

upheaver [7:19 PM]
@aggroed are you coordinating the communication between this group? I will dm you my contact details (edited)

aggroed [7:20 PM]
I was tasked/volunteered to get us all here (edited)
not taking private info at this time

upheaver [7:21 PM]
ok

aggroed [7:23 PM]
for anyone that comes in later we still need a few more in support of steem-institute as a name
currently thumbsupping are crypto, aggroed, upheaver, whatsup from the pinned message (edited)

crimsonclad [7:24 PM]
I thumbsupped the wrong steem-institute by cryptodrive, lol.

Ned [7:26 PM]
guys, let's move fwd, let's publish (edited)
the name should be re-casted if needed
This is not a full group -- and everything should remain on the table, even those community guidelines, and can be re-cast in the first full gathering (edited)

aggroed [7:28 PM]
thats 6. I think its enough for a starting consensus
https://cryptoempirebot.com/msp-waves/@aggroed/steem-town-hall-tonight-steem-witness-forum-10-26-steem-community-gathering
Steemit
Steem Town Hall tonight, Steem Witness Forum 10/26, Steem Community Gathering — Steemit
I have mspwaves shows to announce. I'm doing the weekly Town Hall show tonight. Starts at 8pm (about 2 hours from… by aggroed
Tomorrow at 3:20 AM
I posted that, it has sunday feb 3 as the date i'll host a forum on this. Others can and should host their own and ill try to attend

upheaver [7:31 PM]
cryptoempirebot?

aggroed [7:31 PM]
yeah, it has keychain already implmented
it's amazing

upheaver [7:32 PM]
ah, I see.

aggroed [7:32 PM]
eonwarped made it

llfarms [7:33 PM]
Working on that part

thecryptodrive [7:34 PM]
This is a good starting point on how to structure a constitution https://members.eosdac.io/constitution (edited)
Github may be a good starting point https://github.com/eosdac/constitution/blob/master/constitution.md (edited)

thecryptodrive [7:55 PM]
Ok so we will need a constitution and also I think a monetary policy, some I ideas I would like to add before they slip my mind being, 1- Multisig active/owner keys, attorney holds one of the multisig keys, 2. A smaller petty cash/float type account without need for attorney to sign 3. 70% of funds held in SBD savings, since SBD can be converted to 1 USD of STEEM it helps to preserve value of funds; 30% of funds to enjoy upside potential of STEEM. 4. If SBD > 1.05 USD, suggest leaving newly received funds in STEEM incase of SBD value drop back to peg of 1 USD. (edited)

upheaver [8:03 PM]
Foundations traditionally have pre-approved operational budgets set at % of raised capital, if this grows beyond steem you can probably expect the process for funding / signing off on projects grow beyond the concept of STEEM keys and this will be governed by the foundation's statutes. A bit too early to discuss this in my op.

Ned [8:06 PM]
Could we get a projection on initial post timing @llfarms ?

llfarms [8:07 PM]
Yes, sorry. I’m having technical difficulties and have cryptodrive helping me. I used a claimed account credit and making an account that was was different than what I’m use to. It copied all my keys over and now I’m having to change them. I apologize and feel a bit unintelligent at the moment but am trying to get it switched over, then will post immediately

upheaver [8:07 PM]
What I'm concerned with more at this point is how to structure the foundation model so that:

1. it would be attractive enough for financial supporters
2. it would have a model which would fund the right projects (those that make the most impact on growth or sustainability)
3. it would have a long enough runway so that we don't spend the money too quickly but still make a sizeable / measurable impact
   and to ensure that the least amount of mistakes / waste

pgarcgo (cervantes) [8:19 PM]
Catching up. Great to see the fundation beeing born. I agree with the name steem-institute. Two things I would like to propose (a) If we create a real time chat system for fundation comms (such as discord), it should be a new explicitely created fundation one (all other existing discord communities buildteam, steemspeak, cervantes, PAL, etc could help their members registering in the new server). (b) Having good developers is key, a steem-institute academy should be created where on-line courses for steem-blockchain ingeneering could be offered

llfarms [8:36 PM]
Hey guys, for openness here; account is created, we have memo, active and posting keys. When account was created (through steemworld using an account credit) all keys were the same as my own, which I signed in with and attempted to change them. Somehow the master is not the same though and no other alternative was given at time of creation. Which means we can’t change the master, and mine didn’t work. I honestly have no idea what this reason would be, so if anyone has an idea let me know. Cryptodrive has been attempting as well with no avail. We just want to make sure the account is secure before posting.
I wish I would have just went with the traditional way of creating an account, but since I had claimed an account credit the other day.. I figured why not use it.

thecryptodrive [8:38 PM]
@llfarms has some of the keys except the main, so we would have to do an account recovery, I haven't done a recovery before, does anyone have experience with that?

crimsonclad [8:44 PM]
While working on that, decline payouts , make it the announcement/logs account, and whomever is on foundation after can create actual funding account.

llfarms [8:45 PM]
I was thinking that, two separate accounts for posting/funding may be beneficial in the long run. Even though I feel like an idiot here.. and I have no idea what happened. Still have the steemworld page open trying to figure out what I missed.

crimsonclad [8:47 PM]
This name may not even be accepted in the long run so make it secure as possible, do recovery, but work under the assumption this will have no funds so it isn't critical for that at this second and gives you time to post logs and get through the technical bits to have master down control.
Or just get steem.institute and chuck this one in the fuckit bucket for now.
Which is likely much easier.
And means steem-institute won't be used in a confusing way by a bad actor.

thecryptodrive [8:48 PM]
https://steemit.com/@steem.institute exists

crimsonclad [8:48 PM]
Bollocks

thecryptodrive [8:48 PM]
lol

llfarms [8:50 PM]
Has no one used an account credit to claim one? Is there something specific about getting the master? I’ve made accounts before, I’m somewhat intelligent.. and this baffles me.

crimsonclad [8:50 PM]
I use a script to broadcast claimed account creation, so I'm not sure what happened or how you did it

llfarms [8:53 PM]
Steemworld > claim new account > use existing public keys > create account

It said “account created” and that was it. Then I assumed it must have used my key. Signed in with Active, which worked.. then attempted to change keys and got an error. Cryptodrive reached out and attempted signing in with the master and got an “incorrect passowed” error but all others worked.

Just for public record.
Working on writing up archives to be posted on this account to get it in public. As long as no one has any issues with doing so while we do an account recovery.
Also, I apologize guys. Not sure what happened here. I’ll take full responsibility for it here in case it’s questioned later.

thecryptodrive [8:58 PM]
Not so sure we can recover this as owner key has not changed in last 30 days

Travis Sung [9:06 PM]
joined #community-governance.

thecryptodrive [9:18 PM]
I am not in favour of using an account, even just for communications, that can't be recovered. Users will get used to visiting that account and could be an issue if it gets hacked and false messages displayed on there and we can't recover. As far as I understand it in order to recover, the owner keys must have been changed in the last 30 days.
Unless anyone has ideas on how to get the owner key (which was supposed to be @llfarms original owner key which now doesn't work on signin to steem-institute), I suggest we come up with a diff name.

llfarms [9:23 PM]
I’ve sent him every owner key I have, none of them work. Any ideas are welcome here. You’re all free to flag me as well. (edited)

crimsonclad [9:24 PM]
Get the account without the dash instead and keep moving-

llfarms [9:25 PM]
They are all taken

crimsonclad [9:25 PM]
Unless that exists too? You had asked earlier
Blergh. I'm on my phone in the hallway at a dinner out so there's only so much I can do at this second

thecryptodrive [9:36 PM]
No need to rush, let's wait for others to come online and decide a way forward.

llfarms [9:41 PM]
Should I post archive on my own account to get it on the chain and explain? Then can post on account when decided? Just knew it was important to get it out there as soon as possible.

thecryptodrive [9:50 PM]
I think wait for more people

llfarms [9:52 PM]
Ok

Ned [10:27 PM]
What's the hangup exactly? Name was squatted?
Momentum can die hard.

pharesim [10:32 PM]
joined #community-governance along with 2 others.

pharesim [10:33 PM]
@reggaemuffin started a discord and a github for this idea. i'd suggest to move it over there, so no one gets banned without explanation

ekitcho [10:34 PM]
joined #community-governance.

Ned [10:34 PM]
Someone needs to get an account up and post these logs! please

smooth [10:34 PM]
joined #community-governance.

aggroed [10:34 PM]
it's happening
steem_institute

Ned [10:35 PM]
Thanks :+1:
Steem_Foundation would be a good alternative

aggroed [10:38 PM]
shit, underscores aren't allowed
steemfederation
steemassociation

pharesim [10:40 PM]
steemgov :stuck_out_tongue:

Ned [10:40 PM]
steem-core

llfarms [10:40 PM]
Steem.committee

eonwarped [10:41 PM]
joined #community-governance.

llfarms [10:41 PM]
Steem-core is good

Ned [10:41 PM]
steem-kernel
steem-basis
steem-fidelity
Just view it as temporary
:slightly_smiling_face:

pharesim [10:42 PM]
we could fork out a squatted name

llfarms [10:42 PM]
Steemalliance is available

Ned [10:43 PM]
Great. I'd say go for it

eonwarped [10:43 PM]
are you still stuck on account or you are good?

llfarms [10:43 PM]
Justinescrewedup is available too

eonwarped [10:43 PM]
steeminvite is what i used recently with a whole set of keys

pharesim [10:43 PM]
the account she registered is burned, owner key is unknown
i'd guess a typo somewhere
the one she has isn't a valid wif

aggroed [10:44 PM]
we should put making resource credits as an easier thing to use higher on the list

AusBitBank [10:44 PM]
joined #community-governance.

llfarms [10:47 PM]
I have the owner key saved in multiple places, none worked. All other keys did. I can’t apologize enough, just bad time to try to use a claimed account (RC credit)
Working on the new one

aggroed [10:50 PM]
steemalliance made
llfarms has the key though I paid for the account so it may look like I did it
working on the post now

_{Post made by @llfarms}