logo
ProposalsVotersInfo
©

2025 Agora, the onchain governance company

/
Twitter
/
Github
/
About
ENS Avatar
0xb7...500e
Voting power4.445K
Delegated addresses113
Proposals created0
For/Against/Abstain
110

Delegate Statement

Reposting now in the correct place:

G R E E T I N G S F R E N S

How incredible to see this new development in the ENS Ecosystem!

I @ nettra.eth and I see ENS as critical for efficient, equitable and enjoyable interactions in Web3 going forward.

What is great about Web3 is the ability for individuals to truly own their assets. Beyond financial assets, what is critical for p2p interaction is a clear, yet flexible identity protocol. ENS offers an invaluable service to the Web3 community. Having accessible, effective and prestigious pseudonymous identifiers will be critical to our interactions going forward.

These are my stances on the following points.

AGREE: # I. Name ownership shall not be infringed

Web3 marks a break from Web2 practices. Big Tech and even well-meaning governments try to impose some standardized link between IRL and URL identifiers. I believe that choice and design of ENS names and ENS domains shoudl be up to the individual. We need to continue to protect this choice and this right to our digital property/asset. It is essential that ENS defends this accessible, equitable public service and resists against purely profit-motivated identifiers.

AGREE: # II. Fees are primarily an incentive mechanism

We see this in Web2 and in some low-gas Web3 protocols. No fee leads to more noise and spam. ENS should continue to collect fees to guide the right kind of behaviors that we want to see on the platform. ENS should also be willing to reconsider their fee structure to enable the kinds of behaviors we want to see going forward. We may also want to (very carefully!) consider scholarship programs or their equivalent when necessary. That is what I understand with this phrasing “incentive mechanism”- that is tied to the behavior we want to see (more optimal); not a way to make our overall experience in Web3 less optimal. This is critical for ENS to pioneer as we have seen many Web2 (and even some Web3) companies become distracted by non-essential revenue streams and forget their key purpose.

AGREE: # III. Income funds ENS and other public goods

ENS understands what they do well and carefully considers any new additional services and features. I believe that this is the way. It would also be helpful to have an innovation/R&D/experimental set of activities that are funded by ENS in the spirit of developing necessary public goods. I am grateful for ENS’ leadership in this space as we strive towards slaying Moloch.

AGREE: # IV. ENS Integrates with the global namespace

Despite ENS’ great leadership in this space, it does not act alone and it is also not the oldest identifying system. This last point is critical in the ENS constitution because it prevents us from becoming too tunnel focused on ENS’s dominance (read: “ENS maxi”). As a public good provider, ENS must believe in a pluralistic world where different identifiers will exist. The goal of ENS is not to dominate the space but to improve the space as much as possible. If an existing protocol exists, it behooves ENS and the entire community to respect interoperability, rather than to refuse to cooperate. I particularly like this clause and agree with it wholeheartedly.

AGREE: # V. Amendments to this constitution by majority vote

Our community will evolve, as will the Web3 space. As forward-thinking as these clauses are; we may have forgotten something. This last clause is critical to ensure that the community has a way to alert builders on anything that they have overlooked/may be overlooking as we continue to create in this space.

My Web-3 Qualifications

  • I understand the process through which new technology is commercialized is funded. I understand the threats that different revenue models and market pressures pose to community-driven goals.

It is my day job, received my PhD from Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and teach at Bayes Business School currently I have supported different (crypto) ventures and venture accelerator programs, acting as a director and advisor (for startup), judge (for startup competitions) j

  • I am excited about the possibility of Web3 to help us rebuild industries the way they should have been built the first time: that is, with inclusion and diversity as a key element.

In order to achieve the above, I hosted 19 consecutive episodes of Crypto Beyond Currency interviewing a pioneer in the crypto space (including Makoto Inoue/ENS, Jiho Zirlin/Axie, Jehan Chu/Kenetic, Alexandra Berto-Gilles/Aave and others). I am currently working on my next thing, but you can see resources collected so far at crypto.nettra.club and cryptobeyondcurrency.club.

Past Votes

Snapshot vote - almost 4 years ago

Ratification of the ENS DAO Constitution

Ratify Article I, Ratify Article II, Ratify Article III, Ratify Article IV337 votes
Voted for this proposal 8 months ago with 5.58K votes

[EP 5.28] [Executable] Reimbursement of eth.limo’s ongoing legal fees

Voted against this proposal 8 months ago with 5.58K votes

[EP 5.29] Funding request for Unruggable to build and operate a network of gateways supporting the rollout of ENSIP-19: EVM-chain Reverse Resolution

Reason: I have great respect for the content of the proposal, the proposal team and their track record. I also appreciate the recent clarifications and engagement about the proposal in the dicussion forum. It seems that one of the main motivations for this proposal is around limitations of the Service Provider Program and its funding process. Finally, after reading the threads and discussing with others, I feel it would be more beneficial for the ecosystem if the team were to address the limitations of the Service Provider Program in a separate proposal directed specifically at the Service Provider Program. With their deep understanding of the issues, they can help to improve the process of bringing more qualified, trusted service providers onboard to benefit the ENS ecosystem and ensure that ENS maintains its public good orientation as an open and inclusive ecosystem of builders, innovators and experimenters. Private domain naming services (that raise private funding, and have more stable funding horizons) have their own advantages, but also their drawbacks, and part of the discussion we are having reflects the tension that alternative models present. Of course we want to be fast, competitive and efficient, but we are also building intentionally, slowly, with an eye on the long-term as well as on inclusion. I have a lot of respect for the ENS team, the creators of the Service Provider Program and the spirit in which ENS operates, which has gotten us this far. ENS itself is a long-standing collective experiment, and one of the projects we can be most proud of in the Ethereum ecosystem. I unfortunately will vote against this proposal in the hopes the team will resubmit one or more proposals that address the two important take-aways I see from the past day's discussions. First, we need to ensure that qualified teams can be hired to develop important improvements to the system (+ that they feel valued + that they don't go elsewhere). And second, we *also* need to improve the processes through which ENS is run and by which ENS engages service providers going forward. As the Service Provider Program is only in its first year, I am hopeful that folks will continue to step up to improve it. Voting against, but in gratitude.
Voting PowerDelegated onFromTxn Hash
826.496 ENS11/24/20220xe5...d1f9View
288.402 ENS04/08/20220x17...8cc0View
249.377 ENS04/01/20220x82...e7ebView
444.807 ENS03/15/20220x0c...2475View
25.005 ENS02/19/20220xf1...23b0View