Since everyone else seems to be in a questioning mood,

I have a question myself. Why does everything at iExec seem to be so secretive? Releases aren't given any sort of timelines or really even talked about until they are ready to be released. It seems as if everything is to be done "soon", but then there's a delay or change of plans. Is there any reason for not giving any details about the worker pools that have been on delay for years? Or the privacy pass that was supposed to be released last year but it is "better" now? I just don't seem to get it and it seems that many others might have the same concern.

Great question. Have same concern. To me, being secretive (the 👀, the “stay tuned”) was sort of the way to build up excitement in the initial years. But after 8 years it just feels like a way to cover up the fact that the team isn’t able to offer specifics and a concrete plan

They’re allergic to accountability is my guess

IMO it’s because we want to do things right. Those things take time. We’ve said certain things in the past that have taken much longer than expected, which isn’t always met with patience. So the easier thing to do is to wait until we’re 90% of the way there and announce vs giving an update as soon as something begins.

I understand that, but that just explains the “date” part. It doesn’t explain the rest of Devon’s question re secrecy: why not explain what happened to Privacy Pass in summer 2023? Why not explain why WP gets postponed each time? Why not be open about what Wpass 2 will really entail?

Take yesterday’s exchange for example. We had a CM and an Amb asking specific questions on suggestions to bring back to the team - what do you want to see? How do you envision it? They were met with name calling (“condescending”), accusations of acting in bad faith, straw man arguments, and being allergic to accountability. Those barbs seemed more important than trying to fix the problems the community is identifying. If we have that kind of response when we honestly try to understand what the community wants, it should be understandable that we limit how much we share.

You forgot that in the minute before asking these questions re the concerns, this Amb called the concerns FUD and only price based? And then it’s a surprise these questions arent considerer honest? I don’t want to repeat yesterdays discussion, but please dont leave out key parts when making a point the day after

i did offer honest feedback and ultimately constructive criticism and stayed polite at all time. I do claim tho that i was met with consescending answers yesterday before it becomes better

Things can be lost in translation. I really enjoyed your feedback! Would love to see more

Same here.

thanks Martin! @rararafal maybe keep your cool ;) all that happened yesterday is community (at least a small sample of it), offering articulated frustration on the quality of the communication from the team. saying "team is working on it" becomes less and less satisfactory after 8y of the project existence. I understand you try to do the best you can with the hand given however for a startup 8y is a verrrrrry long time so i would not consider the expectations from the community undue at this point

From my POV, it felt like FUD. So I called it how I saw it.

Agree @mantiss3. You gave good feedback. Something we all agreed on after reviewing the discussion and figuring out next steps.

This has to be a joke. The chats are there. I think you’re assuming people won’t go up and look at context… which is probably wrong.

No FUD yesterday. All people contributed are long holder. so how it can be FUD?

That’s not what I’m assuming. Nothing has been deleted, except for your “allergic” comment. Anyone who wants to review can and draw their own conclusions.

Yeah rafal keep your cool. We don’t need to let emotions cloud good conversation on web3 strategy. Isn’t taking feedback from community what this movement’s all about!

There’s a difference between contributing constructive criticism that we can actually use vs. being negative.

this is an example of a toxic, passive aggressive comment. please refrain from this

How we can be positive after 8 years , when We see a project like Render with same age as RLC which are both categorized in cloud computing has marketcap almost 20 times > RLC? Render core team based on web site is less than 10 people? What has been done during 8 years at IExec? why we canot have those all tools. event , partnership as translation to price?