Archived Core DevOps Fuzz Q1 2024

[fuzzbawls]

There used to be a dev discord, blocked from that

Not true. the now-unused dev discord has only a single user ban, and you are not it.

 

[fuzzbawls]

In turn I apologize to both you Borris @Gerrald and @fuzzbawls because this has caused contention and came from a place of not understanding myself and took time to see.

No need to apologize WRT to this. it was my intention/expectation to mentor newcoming devs in the processes and standards that PIVX requires, and all have adapted quite well thus far. I expected initial reluctance and/or confusion regarding this particular point, but through direct and group communications, you and others have become much better at adhering to PIVX's code standards. I applaud this growth!

 

[johnnylaw]

Thank you for your words and support!

Some might not know this, but March 8th will be my **SEVEN YEAR** anniversary working for PIVX. That is longer than many projects are even alive/relevant in the crypto space.

I wasn't part of the original development team, but rather joined initially as a volunteer outside contributor like many others that have come (and gone) since. That volunteer period didn't last very long, as a couple of the existing devs I had worked with on prior projects, and was quickly added to the budget payroll. Once that happened, I stopped all freelance work to focus solely on PIVX, which is where I've been and still remain all these years later.

These past seven years have not always been smooth sailing, after all, nothing is great **ALL** the time. I've been here through several organizational and team changes. I stepped up as dev team lead when S3ven left and completely restructured the (at the time) personal `PIVX-Project` github account into the organization account we have today that allows for multiple members/teams and granular control over access permissions. At the same time I also took over the responsibility of the dev team budget. What was previously vague and non-concise was made completely transparent as to exactly where funds were going.

It is really unfortunate that we're in the current situation of having a MNO purposely sabotaging vital proposals (not just mine) for reasons unrelated to what the proposals outline as work being done. This careless act puts critical infrastructure, services, expertise, resources, and knowledge at risk of being lost; as well as creates a hostile environment and dissuades would-be contributors from participating.

I've not had the opportunity to interact with you much previous to the last year, but I've literally seen your efforts in nearly all of workflow streams I have investigated. As someone who contributes to the infrastructure for $DGB and $KMD, I know just how tedious some of these endeavors are. In all of my reviews, I've seen nothing but clear thinking and methodical problem solving.

As far as a MNO potentially sabotaging vital proposals without providing any serious inquiries to address, it could just be a matter of lack of capacity. Some people reach their intellectual limits, without ever knowing that they have. Truly sad to see this sort of short-sighted behavior, especially when we are now arriving at the very precipice of WHY protocols like $PIVX exist. Regardless, I remain hopeful that the individual asks meaningful questions, with an intention to at least understand the perspective, rather than just attempting to refute.

 

[johnnylaw]

That level of entitlement is why I'm glad people have voted the proposal down but again I'm pretty sure it's Eric creating the idea of a dao charade. Your role maybe needed but everyone is replacable for someone to fill those shoes.

Your lack of commits and work shown for months and months is why you should be voted out. The last devs who are no longer with us due to I won't get into again discussions, removed you from their proposals as you were not pulling your weight then and you certainly have not been for months.

I can put quotes from current devs that say your the bottle neck when it comes to core commits which is why they prefer working for labs but why stir shit up.

*prediction* votes change last minute, Eric writes a speech thanking people for changing their minds. Dao charade continues.

Look at your work that can be seen for the masternode voters to decide if to vote yes or no and see if you feel this is enough? Maybe abit of self reflection is what you need instead of insulting voters who you say are purposely sabotaging proposals. NO that is not the reason. The reason is no/little work is being done to warrant your funds or other proposals that have been voted down.

To everyone. Learn from this, don't expect and feel entitled for funds. Show your worth and the votes will follow

Not sure you understand how BlockChain voting works. I mean if we're going to start whipping out our stacks and measuring. You probably want to check yourself one last time.

That level of entitlement is why I'm glad people have voted the proposal down but again I'm pretty sure it's Eric creating the idea of a dao charade. Your role maybe needed but everyone is replacable for someone to fill those shoes.

Your lack of commits and work shown for months and months is why you should be voted out. The last devs who are no longer with us due to I won't get into again discussions, removed you from their proposals as you were not pulling your weight then and you certainly have not been for months.

I can put quotes from current devs that say your the bottle neck when it comes to core commits which is why they prefer working for labs but why stir shit up.

*prediction* votes change last minute, Eric writes a speech thanking people for changing their minds. Dao charade continues.

Look at your work that can be seen for the masternode voters to decide if to vote yes or no and see if you feel this is enough? Maybe abit of self reflection is what you need instead of insulting voters who you say are purposely sabotaging proposals. NO that is not the reason. The reason is no/little work is being done to warrant your funds or other proposals that have been voted down.

To everyone. Learn from this, don't expect and feel entitled for funds. Show your worth and the votes will follow.

You are a contradiction unto yourself. So that's fun. Are you trying to win something or improve the protocol? I'm not sure I understand.

 

[johnnylaw]

I appreciate the feedback and to elaborate for you on "commits from fuzzbawls" As DevOps goes, the better the DevOps the less we should see of them. The work is meant for automation purposes, testing, quality control, and these along these lines. He runs the entire test suite and keeps that functional for many scenarios, builds, and more to keep us from having issues say at release time or upon merging of code. He is the one managing all the dependencies, as Devs we are more specialized and he is specialized in making sure at all times our code remains compatible with every arch type for every operating system. So I understand if you do not know the details of the job so well it's hard to understand what you are voting yes for. Although he outlines these in his proposal, I get why you want confirmation of these things.

To re-address the 'fuzzbawls being the holdup' I have said he has bottlenecked us in the past but that was also before fully understanding his role and what he does for us myself. We all have gained much respect and appreciation for what Fuzzbawls does for us. Especially this week in preparing for the new release so we remain compliant with Binance. The build process is hours long and he owns that entire thing. He is methodical and has a process we must follow because especially over time it has proven itself time and time again for us. Sometimes it is hard for Developers to communicate, but this is the key point, this role is very important, would be a drain on any development time, and has a large learning curve for all of our current developers as well as some would not want to even bother.

In turn I apologize to both you Borris @Gerrald and @fuzzbawls because this has caused contention and came from a place of not understanding myself and took time to see.

Love to see clear thinking, humility and above all growth. #Winning.

 

[johnnylaw]

Thanks for your input liquid! Those nos are not me for your proposal btw. Thats Eric. Yes from me and look forward to rusty being setup.

It has been mentioned before about all devs. I even suggested a dev chat or report where all of you can publicly discuss how you think it's going, what are the problems currently in the dev team where problems could be discussed publicly and questions asked. That's not available for myself and others currently because you have blocked us from asking questions! I don't count this forum. Hardly anyone is on here or checks it compared to how many are in the community.

There used to be a dev discord, blocked from that, main Discord is a censorship sess pit with bans of any other view blocked.

The problem is lack of transparency of what's going on for masternode owners to cast their votes especially when your blocking a view you disagree with discussions.

You ask why the no votes are there but when you get the wrong answer that isn't aligned with your own you shut it down and turn it into insults saying were sabotaging work to be done.

I see no work being done from this proposal bar a few commits. I have to ask for info on other proposals. Luckily Jeffery gives his run down on some and this month there is people putting proposals in I have never even seen invovled in pivx so Jeffery is doing them a solid by bigging them up.

Tell me how you expect me to get the information to cast my votes without being allowed to discuss with anything publicly on the supposed dao discord which fuzzbawls supports the censorship?

I see a few commits and that's it. There are multiple messages of fuzzbawls being the hold up yet my decision to vote no is wrong? Tell me how I am meant to come to a yes decision when that's what I s

Unfortunately, I can't prove the negative. That is a logical impossibility. So, I have no choice but to let you think that.

But, while NOT conclusive, the fact is, you are the one who has DM'd multiple team members threatening to vote NO on their proposals. Actions have consequences. Own it.

 

[Eric_Stanek]

Prediction: Super Proposals are coming back, to block votes from MNOs that lack critical thinking skills.

 

[Gerrald]

Prediction: Super Proposals are coming back, to block votes from MNOs that lack critical thinking skills.

Great Canadian mind set. If we remove the choice they can't vote no...or you risk losing other people in a proposal by combining them with a failing person.

Bit of advice for people thinking of combining into a super proposal. Don't go down with a failing/heavily downvoted proposal. If super proposals come back they are getting voted down.

Be your own bank is the slogan that gets thrown about alot. Be your own proposal would be a good one to show your own worth, not tag along with someone else who may be hindering your chances of funding.

 

[Eric_Stanek]

You have yet to give ANY logic at all, as to why this proposal should not be supported. Those voting it down are deeply hurting PIVX. It is utterly shameful and disgusting.

 

[Jeffrey]

As someone who likes to stay neutral and see the contribution of each unique human to the PIVX ecosystem it's safe to say that @fuzzbawls played a huge role in bringing PIVX to where it is. He encouraged me in the beginning and assisted me with support. Many of us may not have been here still if it were not for him. As a dev ops its important to note that not everything is public. This is a norm for any industry. He actively leads and assists all core developers and ensures that everything is delivered in a smooth and timely manner and also assisted Binance with the upgrade and even exchanges such as Biconomy with the implementation. Coordination between all development is often lead by Fuzzbawls. It is imperative this his role and his dues are paid. Sure we are growing and will add new developers and Fuzz will be there to guide them. @Gerrald and @Eric_Stanek I hate being the one to sometimes be asked to pick sides, I cannot guide any of your vote but i implore you to look passed differences and don't view Fuzz as an individual you may or may not have a vendetta against but rather fuzz as being one of the major pillars of the project.

If you support the growth of PIVX you support Fuzzbawls. That is the reality.

 

[Jeffrey]

Forks, chain issues and team issues amongst development are all diverted and mitigated thanks to the work of @fuzzbawls so please lets add logic and reason before voting to want to remove this person from the paid position. Thank you everyone.

 

[Eric_Stanek]

Just because you can't see all the work Fuzz does, doesn't mean he isn't working or the value isn't there.

I get that you WANT to see it. I do too. But, I can't either. Knowing that it isn't always possible, even with detailed reporting, I then base my decisions on what people I trust, who are closer to the work being done, have to say.

EVERYONE is supporting Fuzzbawls. That's how you know he deserves a YES vote. Way easier to do your due diligence that way too.