From my perspective, it looks like the NO votes are

either:
- people who mistakenly think NO means renegotiate
- bad at math, think the conversion rate isnt fair
- confused about how the token merger works
- actual members of the SC spreading FUD bc they'll lose their job with the new hierarchy

Am I missing something?
I can understand some voting no on 2, but a no on 1 kinda feels like we're shooting ourselves in the foot.

the SC will lose their job either way

I'd like to know why they were being paid and how much 😂

Agreed

An army of minions trying to bring down the merge… it really feels like these people have an agenda here or they are just sheep

Both sides think the other is the sheep xD

Or shorting?

I don't comment here often and now i remembered why, it seems nobody here read the vision paper, bunch of self centered fudders and ding dongs... HoStIlE tAkE oVeR. Way to kill any meaningful potential there was to decentralized agi / asi.

The good side support the team they invested in.

There is no "good" side only differing opinions

Стикер

Exactly, I bet all these people didn’t even bother to read the document

a hostile takeover where the ceo of the company being acquired is appointed ceo of the whole thing

Yes, they parrot the same meaningless things like why not 1:1 conversion, they gonna cut my tokens in half, hostile takeover, we dont nees allies... Really reading this chat is like listeting to conspiracy theorists and antivaxers during covid. Truly demoralizing if you ask me, agix alone cant compete with giants especially if we are a decade behind already...

Antivaxers 🤔

To play devils advocate here, one could similarly claim that you just parrot what ben gortzel says without considering the consequences

I dont know what Ben says, but agi this project can't progress in meaningful way without allies and supercomputers and hundreds of milions / bilions of investments. Who is gonna invest in decentralized ai? Nvidia? Google? One might say that the merge is calculated gamble, but it is the only chance to be competitive in this market

Exactly

And that a very fair and valid point, I was only attempting to show that insult hurrling can easily be applied in both directions. I voted yes to both proposals myself, but i certainly dont disagree with a lot of the points of contention that have been brought up

I will be doing the same… we also have to remember there is a clear interest from centralised organisations to disrupt things in here

Agreed. That's why we must ensure the resulting organisation is decentralised. Instead the proposed merger leads to heavy centralisation with an unelected and unaccountable council composed of just the founders. That's worse centralisation than big tech. Please vote no to support decentralisation and then support a proposal with a better governance structure

That’s why we should not have the right to vote. The team should decide what they think is the best on their own. Democracy is great, but not for every decision.

I agree 100% agree, even tho that will be very unpopular opinion here😁😁

Go buy OpenAI shares if you want "the team" to decide for you

Yes-voter here, but I cannot agree with this. Not with the scale of what being proposed.

You know that if the team vote, you won’t be able to do anything about the results right? They own much more tokens than the people that are currently voting.

Why are we voting then?

To keep up the illusion of democracy

😂👍

To make you think you can decide 😅