Title: Dispute
User: cp0x
Reason for dispute:
Unfortunately, it is impossible to determine from the Karma table exactly which comments were not included in those that are taken into account when calculating.
Therefore, I will have to send a list of all comments, and you can tell me which were not taken into account/got lost.
If you think that some of my comments are also not useful, please write as well:
- AIP: Whitelist Infura Nova Validator - #15 by cp0x
I find it useful that I found out that Infura is not officially a DAC participant. - Research on context and retention - #68 by cp0x
I had several comments, but I think this one is useful to close the dialogue about the possibility of access to open data. - Team #6: An (EIP-4824 powered) daoURI for the Arbitrum DAO - #28 by cp0x
Since this proposal was voiced earlier at GovHack Brussels, you may not have taken my comments into account. - LTIPP Retroactive Community Funding - #10 by cp0x
I was one of the participants who applied for this grant, so I have a comment. - Establishing a DAO Events Budget for 2025 - #19 by cp0x
Here I asked a practical question about ARB conversion, and it was not the only comment. - [NON-CONSTITUTIONAL] - Arbitrum Research and Development Collective [Term 2] - #10 by cp0x
This is one of the most discussed topics, so I had a lot of questions. - Proposal [Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum Treasury Token Swap Program - #26 by cp0x
This proposal was submitted twice, so you may not have seen my comment in the original version. By the way, my comments influenced the final version for voting. - There wasn’t much to discuss here.
- Reconfirmation of GCP Council Appointees - #11 by cp0x
I wrote questions about the previous member of the committee, why he left and had personal correspondence with John Kennedy about this. Also in my thread I expressed my opinion that there are other members who did not get into the board, although they received more votes in the earlier voting.
So I think I definitely have 8 useful comments out of 9.