Please vote for Marketing Fund fundkeepers River333 and Cybnate (closed)



According to the Marketing Fund charter fund keepers can only be in their role for 6 months. River333 and myself have been fulfilling this role since July last year.
We have tried to find other candidates willing to take the fundkeeper role, but unfortunately we haven’t been successful. With River333 being a ‘Hero member’ and myself having ‘No life but Peercoin’ we couldn’t get ourselves to close the fund and walk a way. So here we (River333 and Cybnate) are as candidate fundkeepers for another 6 months.

Please vote for either River333 or Cybnate or both of us.

A valid vote is just a post in this thread with one or two names before 20 January 2015 23:59 (GMT).
The vote counting will take a place as described in the extract from the charter below.

FYI Marketing Fund links
Peer4commit page:
Forum board:

Extract from charter relevant for the Voting process

Role of the fund keeper
The fund keepers will hold the private key to the Fund. The Fund is held by at least two fund keepers via multi-sig when practically available to them. The fund keepers will ensure that processes in this charter are followed before any funds are transferred. This includes related processes as maintaining a blacklist of voters, inviting voters to vote, inviting submitters to submit proposals and advertising the Marketing Fund as they deemed fit.
The fund keeper is a voluntarily role and is chosen by the community. The fund keeper does not own the funds and is only assigned by the community to ensure the processes in this charter are adhered to. Any costs required for the Fund (e.g. advertising) will be submitted in a similar way as other proposals applying for the Fund. When a Fund keeper can’t agree for personal reasons to an approved submission which followed process in this charter properly, the fund keeper shall step down.
The fund keeper won’t allow submissions for voting if the required funds are not available in the Fund.

Appointing fund keepers
There will be at least two fund keepers and maximum 3 fund keepers. Fund keepers will be appointed according to a similar voting process as Very Large Submissions. Fund keepers will automatically step down after 6 months, but can apply for a further 6 months term without constraints. In all cases voting will occur.
Large and Very Large Submissions may be put on hold at discretion of remaining fund keeper if there is only one fund keeper left.
Fund keepers can step down at any time at their discretion. It is preferred to receive timely notice in order to find another suitable candidate and follow the required voting process.

Voting and Voting eligibility
There are two types of votes;

  1. votes by normal voters (“Voters”)
  2. votes by core community members (“Peervoters”)

Only community members with an active account created more than 3 months before the voting occurs and with a karma>4 may vote. Those are called ‘Voters’. Voters can be added to a blacklist by the community. This may occur when the Voter is misbehaving, or is not behaving as a contributing member to the Peercoin community, spamming, has a purposely created account or has not been contributing for more than 3 months in a row. Adding voters to the blacklist will be done at discretion of fund keepers. The fund keeper may seek advice via a thread in or r/Peercoin before adding voters to a blacklist.

For the purpose of voting on submissions requesting significant funding another type of voter has been created. These voters are core community members. Core community members have active accounts over 6 months with >49 posts and karma >20. Those are called ‘Peervoters’. Peervoters can only added to the blacklist when at least 5 other core community members request this. Peervoters do have an equal vote weight to Voters except when voting for Very Large Submissions. See Voting Process. Fund keepers will assume Peervoter status during their role even if they don’t match the criteria.

Voting process

  • For each submission there must be at least 8 valid votes by Voters. When there are less than 8 valid votes at the deadline the submission will be automatically rejected.
  • When there is equality of votes, only the Peervotes are counted. When there are at least 3 Peervotes, the result of that would count as the final vote. In all other situations one of the fund keepers will provide the deciding vote to their discretion.
  • For proposals >250 PPC (Large Submission) at least 5 Peervoters must vote to make the voting results valid. All votes count as one for Large Submissions.
  • For proposals >1000 PPC (Very Large Submission) Peervotes will count as two standard votes for Very Large Submissions
  • Rejected proposals can only be resubmitted 10 weeks after the voting or earlier when significant changes to the proposal have been made. Any changes and reasoning needs to be proved to the fund keeper and they will decide at their discretion, which may include a consultation process with the community.
  • Approved proposals can only be resubmitted 10 weeks after the voting if they require additional funding or continued funding.
    Submissions with a request for an amount less than 20 PPC (Small Submission) may be approved by the fund keepers at their discretion without going through the voting process. When deemed controversial or unusual, they will still follow the normal voting process.
    Voting will occur in a designated thread. This will be the thread with the submission or a thread clearly linked to in the original submission thread. A valid vote from a Voter or Peervoter must contain a reference to the proposal and a clear yes or no. All voters are encouraged to add a voluntary explanation why they voted yes or no so future submitters can improve their proposals and assess their chances on success.
    Any alias/person can only vote once. Aliases which appear to be all from one person will be added to the voting blacklist at the discretion of the fund keepers

Glad to see you guys willing to continue in these roles, as you’ve both done an outstanding job so far.

So I vote for both Cybnate and River333 as marketing fundkeepers.

I vore for both river333 and Cybnate. You’re awesome!

I vote for both Cybnate and River333 :slight_smile:

I vote for both Cybnate and River333

I vote both!

I vote for Cybnate and River333

I vote for both Cybnate and River333 -
I would love to be able to vote within Peerunity

I vote for both Cybnate and River333.
And I agree with @pillow: you are awesome!

A vote for both!

Keep up the good work!

I vote for both too (Cybnate and River333). Keep up the good work!

Vote for both

I would like to cast my vote in favor of Cybnate and River333.

I vote for river333 and Cybnate.

Thanks to both of you.


Keep up the good work.

I vote River333 and Cybnate.

Thanks for the good work.

I vote for both Cybnate and River333

Thank you!

I vote for both Cybnate and River333

Your work is highly appreciated!

I vote for Cybnate and River333

Thank you again to be available to look after the marketing fund!

A valid vote is just a post in this thread with one or two names before 20 January 2015 23:59 (GMT)

Well we have a couple of them. Thank you very much for voting and what a result! I’m glad to see that the community has a lot of confidence in both River333 and myself.
I would have preferred to have seen one or two new fundkeepers, but it still feels good to be able to continue to support this great community with a great coin and pretty unique developers.

I’ve just counted the number of votes (not the Peervotes) as we are far beyond the threshold and there are no votes against.
Total valid votes counted as per today: 16 (and two non-eligible votes but thanks for supporting anyway)

Ok, that’s it folks! Let’s get on with it. See if we can get @peerchemist’s proposal accepted.
And please don’t be shy, you can also submit a proposal 8)