Your accusations are completely unfair, particularly that Ludo has developed a reputation for abusing the xGov process. To the contrary, Ludo has been an active member of the Algorand ecosystem for over three years now. In the beginning, he was building here for free and without any funding.
Overtime, he has clearly worked extremely hard and added significant value to the ecosystem. He won these grants fair and square through the xGov process. If you don’t like his proposals, don’t vote for them. Aside from Fabrice, who has since left the ecosystem, I am not sure there is anyone who has dedicated themselves more to Algorand than Ludo.
Beyond that, I don’t think your accusations should be taken seriously given that you are not doxxed. You could certainly be a market competitor for Ludo spreading FUD. All else being peripheral, Ludo has a reputation as a builder here with a tireless commitment to the network. He’s earned his awards and deserves to be paid for his work.
Whether you think it fair or not, it is the truth that he has developed this reputation. You can discount my critique all you want based on who I am (or rather your lack of knowledge over my identity) but I gave specific examples of why I think this reputation has been formed (and why I think it’s not entirely undeserved).
But, since we are on the subject of identity based arguments, let me just say that if he wants to shake that reputation, it won’t come from other grant farmers like yourself trying to gaslight us. Instead he’s going to need to actually deliver on some of these past promises in a way that demonstrates value instead of just ticking boxes so he can get his grant paid.
I absolutely respect your right to privacy in your identity. However, when you are using your anonymity to attack, accuse, or discredit others, it raises a huge red flag.
All grants I have been awarded are milestone based performance grants. This means if we do not produce according to the contract deliverables at the sole discretion of the Foundation, we do not get paid. This is an extremely low-risk and valuable contract mechanism that I believe works very well for the Algorand network.
I’m not using my anonymity for anything. My identity is irrelevant. That’s the good thing about solid argument, it rests on its own weight.
This is not true. Vague deliverable descriptions have been shown to essentially tie the hands of AF, as was evident over the debates related to payment for milestone 2 of the clAMM DEX.
This is patently false. AF has all the leverage in the grant contracts.
And, yes you are using your anonymity to FUD the work of others. And, yes it does matter because your motivation matters. And, no community wide sentiment obviously does not agree because they voted to pass both Ludo’s proposals.
This and the ensuing discussion would suggest otherwise. Ludo is going to get paid for a clAMM DEX that doesn’t currently function because his deliverables were vague enough to arguably be met.
We also have around ~1500 bots voting and a system where there is no method for voting in the negative on a specific proposal. An idea that the majority of stake believes is terrible can still pass based on the affirmative votes of a minority of stake.