{"id":197,"name":null,"username":"0xPhilipp","avatar_template":"/user_avatar/forum.phoenix.money/0xphilipp/{size}/7_2.png","created_at":"2026-10-19T22:09:32.905Z","cooked":"\u003caside class=\"quote no-group\" data-username=\"Ex_TFL\" data-post=\"56\" data-topic=\"47\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"title\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"quote-controls\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cimg alt=\"\" width=\"24\" height=\"24\" src=\"https://forum.phoenix.money/user_avatar/forum.phoenix.money/ex_tfl/48/92_2.png\" class=\"avatar\"\u003e Ex_TFL:\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cblockquote\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe suggestion is simple: will you make it a binding condition that any removal that does occur is only done so with an approved arrangement preventing you and MB becoming sufficient authority alone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/blockquote\u003e\n\u003c/aside\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI couldn’t care less about such a clause. I have not taken a single action that I believe other independent, Terra-aligned Directors would not have supported. (Including putting up A272)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhat I will not accept, however, is a governance structure that effectively grants individual Directors veto power or permanent job security. That was essentially the outcome of \u003cstrong\u003eRose’s alternative proposal\u003c/strong\u003e, previously shared publicly in a community group but since made private, which would have further entrenched both Rose and Vini and made future accountability nearly impossible.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe reason I insist on separating removal from the appointment of new Directors is simple: no reasonable candidate would want to be dragged into an ongoing governance dispute.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe have already approached two highly qualified potential Directors, including both new and former contributors, to bring fresh perspectives and experience to PF.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo address concerns about a temporary 2-of-3 multisig, I am willing to make a \u003cstrong\u003elegally binding, off-chain commitment\u003c/strong\u003e to vote only No or Abstain during that period, \u003cstrong\u003eexcept on proposals necessary to onboard the new independent Directors\u003c/strong\u003e. I am already KYC-verified, so I have no issue formalizing that commitment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBut the two processes must remain separate. New Directors should join to help build PF’s future, not be forced to take sides in a dispute they had nothing to do with.\u003c/p\u003e","post_number":57,"post_type":1,"posts_count":87,"updated_at":"2026-10-19T22:16:30.345Z","reply_count":2,"reply_to_post_number":56,"quote_count":1,"incoming_link_count":3,"reads":21,"readers_count":20,"score":59.2,"yours":false,"topic_id":47,"topic_slug":"phoenix-foundation-appointment-of-an-emergency-supervisor","display_username":null,"primary_group_name":null,"flair_name":null,"flair_url":null,"flair_bg_color":null,"flair_color":null,"flair_group_id":null,"badges_granted":[],"version":2,"can_edit":false,"can_delete":false,"can_recover":false,"can_see_hidden_post":false,"can_wiki":false,"user_title":null,"bookmarked":false,"raw":"[quote=\"Ex_TFL, post:56, topic:47\"]\nThe suggestion is simple: will you make it a binding condition that any removal that does occur is only done so with an approved arrangement preventing you and MB becoming sufficient authority alone\n\n[/quote]\n\nI couldn’t care less about such a clause. I have not taken a single action that I believe other independent, Terra-aligned Directors would not have supported. (Including putting up A272)\n\nWhat I will not accept, however, is a governance structure that effectively grants individual Directors veto power or permanent job security. That was essentially the outcome of **Rose’s alternative proposal**, previously shared publicly in a community group but since made private, which would have further entrenched both Rose and Vini and made future accountability nearly impossible.\n\nThe reason I insist on separating removal from the appointment of new Directors is simple: no reasonable candidate would want to be dragged into an ongoing governance dispute.\n\nWe have already approached two highly qualified potential Directors, including both new and former contributors, to bring fresh perspectives and experience to PF.\n\nTo address concerns about a temporary 2-of-3 multisig, I am willing to make a **legally binding, off-chain commitment** to vote only No or Abstain during that period, **except on proposals necessary to onboard the new independent Directors**. I am already KYC-verified, so I have no issue formalizing that commitment.\n\nBut the two processes must remain separate. New Directors should join to help build PF’s future, not be forced to take sides in a dispute they had nothing to do with.","actions_summary":[{"id":2,"count":2}],"moderator":true,"admin":true,"staff":true,"user_id":3,"hidden":false,"trust_level":2,"deleted_at":null,"user_deleted":false,"edit_reason":null,"can_view_edit_history":true,"wiki":false,"post_url":"/t/phoenix-foundation-appointment-of-an-emergency-supervisor/47/57","reactions":[{"id":"heart","type":"emoji","count":2}],"current_user_reaction":null,"reaction_users_count":2,"current_user_used_main_reaction":false,"can_accept_answer":false,"can_unaccept_answer":false,"accepted_answer":false,"topic_accepted_answer":null}