Which is why I voted No on Serviceplan. I also voted no on the influencer proposal. Because: „Engagement“ in clicks or likes is NOT user adoption, commercial value, or measurable action (purchase/transaction with ADA). I do marketing by the old book. Has worked for 30 years.

This was an unoriginal idea, presented in a dishonest way. It was not a good proposal. It was not well presented. The brochure made many claims that the paid for advertising wouldn't just be here today gone tomorrow. But that is exactly what it was. A throwaway campaign putting adverts in train stations in order to get ‘supply chain managers’ and ‘institutional de-fi managers’ to (and I’m not kidding) fill in an online form. I asked several proposers the basic, but crucial, question about who would receive these business leads, all refused to answer. In my view that was a deliberate attempt to obfuscate the ultimate beneficiary of the proposal, and extremely disrespectful to the community. The proposal was organised by the CF, to get business leads the CF would love, advertising in the home of the CF. It included money to pay the CF to refresh their business landing page or ‘hub’, so they can use more community funds do what they were set up and already funded to do. Yet somehow everyone I contacted about this claimed that ‘who would handle the leads’ was such an insignificant issue they hadn’t even thought about it! Remarkable! I cannot believe that the CF would be involved in this and then just give away the results of it to other ecosystem participants. I cannot believe that Serviceplan would organise a campaign with no idea of who would be dealing the leads it aims to generate. I cannot believe they were being honest. - Every board serves the people who put them there, the people who can remove them. In the case of the board of the CF, that is not the Cardano community. The CF wanted tens of thousands of dollars in this proposal to put up a billboard at Davos. So their name could be seen by the very people who seized control of what should have been a community foundation. The CF board, using our communities treasury money to advertise in front of the people they answer to, is an insult on top of an injury. The injury being the theft of the foundation from our community by those very same people. - And a final point on competence. The CF already has a business development contact page. When this proposal was released I created an email address and sent in a professional business contact request, stating that I was in the supply chain management business, the very business that this proposal would supposedly target. That was weeks ago and I’ve heard nothing but crickets…

Can Serviceplan see Cardano turning a profit to support or sustain a marketing contract with? Reserve emissions although consistent also debase the market value of the assets required for funding. This must be a unique situation for them and a bit more uncertain than normal.

I’m not trying to grift but i have to ask does Serviceplan see Cardano as good product investment? They appear to be more profitable than the entire Cardano ecosystem, which produces very little income. Thier existing clients are all very profitable companies with revenue.

Greetings from the Serviceplan headquarters in Munich. Things to be discussed, deals to be made. Let's go Masumi.

Catalyst never had a majority or even a large minority of ada holders participating; and the winners were usually from a small subset of the community propped up by institutions either IO, CF or Emurgo. What we see now; such as Patrick Toblers inability to get a treasury withdrawal passed in governance is that when the people really can decide; and not a small number of institutions, we deny him the money (serviceplan) I think it’s more important now than before to remind the community of who did what and who’s who still; since the data available on catalyst isn’t shown to DReps or voters in treasury actions. It’s our duty to remind the community of actors track records. What we should do now is ask why institutions like the CF seem to unilaterally support these three clowns taking up so much funding, resources and opportunities that could serve others; rather than spreading the opportunity out across more candidates

德国议会开始认真讨论 AI 代理互相支付的场景，这不再是科幻设定。Masumi Network 创始人 Patrick Tobler 在联邦议院区块链圆桌会议上展示了实际运行的系统：AI 雇佣 AI，托管、身份验证和结算全部跑在 $ADA 链上，德国广告巨头 Serviceplan 已经参与共建。 重点在于，这个演示不是概念片。Tobler 明确说企业已经在 Sokosumi 市场上买卖代理，用稳定币结账。议会层级的曝光加上真实商业案例，意味着机器经济正在从加密原生实验往主流合规场景渗透。$ADA 被选作结算层，说明其在企业级身份和支付基础设施上的定位被实际采用方认可，而非仅靠社区叙事支撑。

AI agents that pay each other just got a hearing in the Bundestag The German Parliament hosted a panel on machine pay machines. @MasumiNetwork's Patrick Tobler presented inside the Bundestag's Blockchain Roundtable: an agent economy where AI hires AI, with escrow, identity and payments settled on @Cardano (cardano:native). The pitch isn't theoretical. Per Tobler (@Padierfind), companies already hire and sell agents on Masumi's Sokosumi marketplace, paying in stablecoins, with German ad giant Serviceplan as co-builder.