This proposal recommends the removal of City of Zion (COZ) as a voting entity in GrantShares.
The rationale is structural: GrantShares’ governance requires members who can evaluate proposals neutrally, without conflicts of interest or privileged access. COZ’s dual role as both an ecosystem service provider and a funding recipient creates a direct conflict that has already influenced decisions.
The clearest example of why COZ should not hold voting power is Proposal #152. The applicant was not an ecosystem builder, had no technical track record, and openly requested funds for a trip to Dubai. There were no milestones, deliverables, an integration plan, or a documented community benefit.
Despite that, the proposal was approved. All votes in favor came from individuals directly tied to ecosystem payroll or COZ-aligned circles. Months later, there is still no follow-up, no results, no progress report, and no accountability.
The only consistent beneficiary of this decision was the applicant himself. This is not a “risk” that didn’t work out; it is a governance failure that directly contradicts the published rules and the stated mission of GrantShares.
Proposal Info 📋
[ {
"target_contract" : "0xf15976ea5c020aaa12b9989aa9880e990eb5dcc9",
"method" : "removeMember",
"params" : [ {
"type" : "PublicKey",
"value" : "02591908940f761b631e21e1fb88f290f5b26d07cbcb21841884bc04a5ea0d1a0a"
} ],
"call_flags" : 11
} ]
👇 React with 👍 if you liked it, or 👎 if you think this proposal can be enhanced!
This proposal recommends the removal of City of Zion (COZ) as a voting entity in GrantShares.
The rationale is structural: GrantShares’ governance requires members who can evaluate proposals neutrally, without conflicts of interest or privileged access. COZ’s dual role as both an ecosystem service provider and a funding recipient creates a direct conflict that has already influenced decisions.
The clearest example of why COZ should not hold voting power is Proposal #152. The applicant was not an ecosystem builder, had no technical track record, and openly requested funds for a trip to Dubai. There were no milestones, deliverables, an integration plan, or a documented community benefit.
Despite that, the proposal was approved. All votes in favor came from individuals directly tied to ecosystem payroll or COZ-aligned circles. Months later, there is still no follow-up, no results, no progress report, and no accountability.
The only consistent beneficiary of this decision was the applicant himself. This is not a “risk” that didn’t work out; it is a governance failure that directly contradicts the published rules and the stated mission of GrantShares.
Proposal Info 📋
Proposal Type:
remove-memberMember Public Key:
0x02591908940f761b631e21e1fb88f290f5b26d07cbcb21841884bc04a5ea0d1a0aMember Address:
NaZwraSdJv9BYwYzZryiZcydaPDof56beKCreated by: @lock9 🚀
Proposal :
https://grantshares.io/app/details/840a3a38661874c4ec20d641d2c3064fLinked Proposal:
https://grantshares.io/app/details/1bc359cd073735be06a1d6c2eebe6c48Raw Intents: 👀
[ { "target_contract" : "0xf15976ea5c020aaa12b9989aa9880e990eb5dcc9", "method" : "removeMember", "params" : [ { "type" : "PublicKey", "value" : "02591908940f761b631e21e1fb88f290f5b26d07cbcb21841884bc04a5ea0d1a0a" } ], "call_flags" : 11 } ]👇 React with 👍 if you liked it, or 👎 if you think this proposal can be enhanced!