Standing Parties: Please score this ANO Candidate from 0 - 60

Results will be visible after the poll closes. Your vote is displayed below.

Results are only viewable after voting.
Those are the hustlers we need and it would be a shame for damo and his team not to be accepted as an ANO. They've already delivered much more than some existing ANOs and I'm sure with the right incentives they will do a lot more. This is exactly the type of outside the box thinkers we need to have part of this community, incentivized and delivering. This guy is proven and his value can be immense.
How solid are pledges you make? The reason I ask is because in a short amount of time you have made quite some promisses or semi promises that you guys would be delivering value/expertise in a certain area. You have been involved with guide elections, moderating, 2 grants and now an ANO candidate. To me it seems like you are all over the place without a clear strategy. The more promisses you make to harder it will be to keep them and deliver. Do you for instance consider the agreement about the podcasts we sponsored to be upheld? (timelines etc).

Don't get me wrong. You are smart and certainly likeable in person, but I personally don't like people making too many semi-promises. So please remove my doubts about that, because I do like some people that have a different take then the majority.

And yes your views are completely your own. Coming from the Netherlands, which is quite liberal, I would never like to change that. However I also would not hire somebody in a public position that mixes drugs and representation of our company. The simple reason, yes I am open minded, but 99% of the world isn't and that reflects on the entity you are representing unfortunately.

So please persuade me, because I do see value in you and your fellow colleagues.
I share the concerns of @Niels Klomp. I'm not a big fan of people trying to jump into every available (paid) position from the very moment they first enter the community, especially when the value add is ambiguous.

It's ambiguous in the sense, that, if I were to hypothesize that your current application gets awarded, I have a hard time envisioning the impact of MaxCollab six months from now because "ecosystem building" is a hard thing to define. That "ecosystem" is going to get built regardless, so how much if any would we attribute to MaxCollab?
I do not shares the concerns of WB and Niels. Niels, the only reason they are all over the place is because of no incentivization structure for people like him. I get that completely.

I'm more than happy with "ecosystem building" coming from skilled marketers and business people. It implies a lot of flexibility and a measure and learn approach. I'd rather have that from damo than "i am going to write 1 blog post per month". This bullshit is good for our "processes" and our "anxiety" but it's not good for business.

I wouldn't be able to write down "pledges" either Niels but I know that I'll be over delivering in value and putting in a lot of time to "build the ecosystem" if I was properly incentivized. Whatever way I find will to be the most effective and efficient as I go.

You need hustlers, again. Not suites and tie people, we have many of those. So if a hustler will tell you he's going to hustle for you the only question is whether you trust them? Pledges are just a way to hold people accountable. I'd rather vote them up and give them 6 months and see what they do. Maybe this will open up a new way of thinking for existing ANOs.
Hello, MaxCollab, thank you for application.
I ask this questions all ANO candidates:

1. With what efficiency are you going to operate?

2. If your efficiency is lower, than 60%:
2.1. What have you already pledged to the Factom? It's a good practice, when ANO candidates pledge works in advance before being elected.
2.2. Do you have an experience in running business? What kind of businesses it were? Please tell us more about it, so we can understand your strengths and what expect from your ANO if it will be elected.
2.3. What a minimum number of hours per week are you going to work for Factom? Do you commit it?

3. Do you participate in any other cryptocurrency projects? If yes, please reveal details.
Thanks for the questions @Anton Ilzheev. And sorry for the delay in responses here, everyone. Most of your questions are answered in responses we’ve already drafted. I’m about to be on the road (for Factom) the rest of the month and planning to relocate to The Bay area soon after (also for Factom). Logistics have been.. challenging. Answers to these and all previous questions incoming before I fly out Monday morning!
Thanks again for the questions, everybody. And thank you for your patience.

So, the consensus (@Colin Campbell @Nic R @Niels Klomp @Valentin Ganev et al) is we need to get more specific. Fair enough! Let me try another angle on our thesis. Then I’ll provide clear bullet points of our pledges (hard and soft), followed by some details from each of us.

The following was too long for an in-line post. Additional Supporting Documentation attached.


Last edited:
As I said I would update, DBGrow flew @damo and @TroyWiipongwii out to the bay area to continue our meetings promoting factom and looking for networking collaborations for the protocol.

We had another strong meeting with the person we are working with in government, and that relationship is moving forward, very very positively.

I also have been able to talk in person with Troy for the first time, and I believe he could be a big asset for this protocol. He is super sharp on the math/theory side of cs, and has experience in policy and economics, a powerful combination in the blockchain space.

The rest of the DBGrow team also felt positive about the contributions these two could make if applied correctly in this protocol.

Great job forming this team Maxcollab.
Ahoy Tor!

The testnet servers went down due to a fault on the VPS. We are investigating the incident further. We’ve preemptively decided to switch to Google (also in Sao Paolo) just in case the provider’s availability is the cause of the outage.

We've been training up Troy and interviewing a handful of server administrators with deeper experience and greater time commitment. We highly value our technical responsibilities as node operators and feel upgrading our server administrator would be highly beneficial. Not the way we had intended to announce we're upgrading our server support!

Troy and our top candidate are practicing setup and brainswaps over the next few days. One or more of the testnet nodes will likely come down again over the next several weeks as we continue vetting additional candidates, and we should have an official announcement of a new member of node support before the end of the ANO voting period.

1) No we have not been in the authority set on the testnet yet. We’re reaching out to the new testnet administrator now.
2) We're training Troy and a new potential hire up on brainswaps now.

I want to thank Erik for getting us up and running. He has been there for us when we needed him and has responded diligently whenever called upon.
Hey guys,

@Alex and @CryptoLogic: Our nodes are all on the same server on time4vps. This was a learning lesson and our servers were back up once we were alerted. For testnet during application time we’ve been focused on getting nodes up, learning brainswaps and keeping cost low, hence the use of time4vps. It turns out there’s been a changing of the guard for testnet server administrator and that’s why we haven’t been added to the Authority Set yet. We’re working w the new admin now and are ready to practice brainswaps as soon as our nodes are promoted.

We are also now moving our servers to google as mentioned in our response above. We will update the community when we have a response from our vps provider about the fault.

@David Chapman, Troy will not be primary server admin. That would be a criminal waste of his core competencies. We’re just bringing him up to speed so we have a core member of MaxCollab fully competent at all required technical tasks.

Erik is still with us and has been very helpful. We realized it would be beneficial to bring on someone with more linux distro experience as our primary server administrator so we’ve been interviewing people over the last couple weeks. This new hire will indeed be the primary server administrator.


Re: business vs personal, I accidentally buried my response at the end of the detailed pledge doc we submitted a few days ago.

“P.S. @MaxCollab is now our official twitter handle. It’s the only handle I’ll be using for public pursuit of MaxCollab and Factom business, though I’ll naturally retweet (without comment) to my 1600 followers @damosdaze. Troy and Joshua may choose to use their personal handles more generally.”

I’m comfortable compromising on this for now bc we’ve got bigger fish to fry and I don’t use Twitter for frontline business comms anyway. I need us to feel comfortable working together.

I just wonder how to handle general crypto twitter discussions. Though intermittent, this has always been my handle for market and political drama in the space. What do you feel makes sense here?
This new hire will indeed be the primary server administrator.
Will they be available for us to ask them questions prior to the end of the Q/A?

P.S. @MaxCollab is now our official twitter handle. It’s the only handle I’ll be using for public pursuit of MaxCollab and Factom business, though I’ll naturally retweet (without comment) to my 1600 followers @damosdaze. Troy and Joshua may choose to use their personal handles more generally.”
I'm pleased to hear it.

I’m comfortable compromising on this for now bc we’ve got bigger fish to fry and I don’t use Twitter for frontline business comms anyway. I need us to feel comfortable working together.
"For now" meaning you plan to go back to business and personal being intertwined?

I just wonder how to handle general crypto twitter discussions. Though intermittent, this has always been my handle for market and political drama in the space. What do you feel makes sense here?
That's up to you but general crypto discussion can be a good way to build your business follower numbers.
Will they be available for us to ask them questions prior to the end of the Q/A?
We have a lead candidate. I’m hesitant to put him on the spot without being certain we’ll be extending an offer, and we’d feel a lot better if we were added to the Authority Set on testnet asap so we can test him on brainswaps before making that call.

If necessary, we have a bio we can share for him and can pass along some questions. But again, we have other candidates and have made no permanent decisions.

"For now" meaning you plan to go back to business and personal being intertwined?
Not necessarily, and *not unilaterally*. My sense is the perceived controversiality of my persona is overestimated, but I don’t wish to belabor that discussion. I’m asking to join a community that has very particular concerns about how it is represented, and I respect those concerns. I’m asking for your trust. I’m willing to earn it. The policy stands unless future discussions allow for otherwise.

To refocus our concerns here, this is what I said in one of my very first interactions on the Factom discord back in October, and have been saying consistently ever since:


I’ve been consistent on this from the start. I’m here to help us grow our community while developing cohesion, direction, and optimism.

Anything else is a distraction.

You’re someone I want to be working with on this, David.

We’re on the same team.
You don't have a server admin three days prior to voting, your testnet servers "faulted" and you can't communicate what that means, you won't give me a definitive yes or no on separation of business and personal, and you're asking me to trust you when I am so passionate about blockchain because I do not trust people.

I'm of the opinion that you're beneficial to the community (I want you incentivized to have certain roles) and others I respect speak well of your team. But you're making it really hard for me to support your candidacy.
Last edited:
We have a server admin right now, about to have a second trained in all critical operations, and several qualified candidates to only improve the situation. It is my understanding that more than a few ANOs have found themselves changing server admins shortly after being elected. We see no reason to be held to a higher standard.

I’ve also given my word that I will separate business and personal on twitter and will under no circumstances unilaterally change that decision. It’s not a trick. Part of the compromise is being open to the possibility that we may one day collectively decide it’s no longer relevant. Nothing more.

Blockchain doesn’t eliminate the need to trust people, David. Only so much can be put on chain (especially in these early days). Everything else relies on human relations.

I’ve built a lot of good faith and solidarity in this community and many others around the world by being honest, supportive, and learning how to trust appropriately. These are critical ingredients in my recipe for community success.

I’m here to cultivate good faith and productive collaboration between as many stakeholders as I can. It’s ok if that’s not your M.O. Both (in balance) have value.

I’d really like to move past the character assessment here and have a productive working relationship with you. I respect whatever decision you need to make, though, and will just keep working to earn your trust.
Your current server admin isn't going to be your primary admin though. Whoever you hire, is. I don't know of a single ANO that didn't have a primary server admin hired prior to their being elected. As I and others have communicated, your team has lacked focus (but has been getting better). As it turns out, you didn't focus on having one of, if not the most critical components to your team. How do we know who you hire is going to end up sufficiently competent? Why should we take that risk when there are at least 4 other teams that definitely do have competent admin?

Thank you for the clarification on the business / personal separation. I feel better about that situation and appreciate your compromise.

People (and things) cannot be trusted. Blockchain, done properly, reduces some of the opportunities, ramifications, and consequences of that fact.
Last edited:
It is not accurate to say we don’t have a primary server admin. We have a primary server admin hired right now. There will be a transition to a new one soon with even more experience than the one we’ve already presented. We chose to do this unilaterally because we take the security and stability of the network very seriously.

Meanwhile, we can’t practice brainswaps because a testnet admin changeover was planned in the middle of the election and we’re in limbo waiting to be added to the Authority Set. So we’re not the only ones doing the best we can with the complexities of running the network.

One foot in front of the other, everybody.
I recognize and appreciate that you've identified the fact that your current admin is not sufficiently experienced and/or competent. That doesn't remove the fact you don't have a server admin that is sufficiently experienced and/or competent with three days prior to our voting.

What message does it send to other teams if we elect a team over them that doesn't yet have an experience / competent admin when step 1 of being an ANO is having an experienced / competent admin? What message does it send to the enterprise companies out there who may be performing their due diligence on our protocol if we elect a company to host a part of the infrastructure that doesn't yet have an experience / competent admin we can evaluate?
The other side of that coin David is that we end up not giving opportunities to very hard working people that have gained many reputation points since joining the community. Yes you are definitely right in the sense that we ideally would have liked damo to have all that in check; but the real question for me is whether you think his team will have all of the System Admin stuff in check in a few weeks. Whether you think he'll be 24/7 available for any issues...

A resounding yes from me based on his existing performance and dedication. He has many many things in check and more that no other ANO comes close to having. So this is about looking forward rather than looking at the present, looking at the potential... And from this team, the potential is absolutely huge. This is a multi decade project let's not forget that.

So in that sense, Enterprise companies would also be looking forward and the potential of companies and hires rather than the present moment. I'd bet they'd be quite happy with these guys joining and growing with the protocol. We have many complementary people and skills and we should use that to our advantage. I'm betting a lot of enterprise companies will even be hearing about this protocol thanks to this team here.

We have to accept that we are all students at some things and absolutely professionals at other things, that's what makes the beauty of this project. Collaboration and co-creation!

I would personally see it as an absolute failure and a wasted opportunity if they are not given a chance to prove themselves after proving themselves so hard without anything else in return.

At the end of the day, what's the point of the ANO removal process if it doesn't allow us to give chances to these teams? It allows us to take some risks in who we bring on and allows us to think outside the box a bit. The potential ROI/the risk of onboarding this team is huge. No arguments can deny that.
Applications shouldn't be considered because someone's either a nice guy or works hard. Paraphrasing @Brian Deery - we're not running a charity here. Dedication is a hard thing to measure. So far we know he's been here five months and is indeed on a dedicated pursuit towards a paid position. Results and deliverables come first and they should be a clearly identifiable value add for the protocol.

Imo I would find it a lot more logical if Damo, for example, joins an existing ANO like DBGrow.
This has nothing to do with Charity, this has to do with either having a startup mindset or a rigid corporate mindset where we'll end up stuck in our own ways and with only similar people in our community. I'm not a fan of that at all.
The fact that we can remove ANOs is a huge benefit and we should take advantage of that and take a bit more risk (perceived) and think outside the box a bit.

Damo is not just talk and a "hard working guy", he's been delivering and adding value to the protocol since he joined. Your message seems to say the opposite. I'd rather have Damo be given the chance to grow his own team and hire his own people based on his needs and his vision. Let's look forward in the future rather than stay stuck in our shortsightedness is my 2 cents.
Just a quick historical perspective that may help you understand why some "old ANOs" are so inquisitive about testnet participation: for the first election of ANOs, many of the applicants ran on the testnet for nearly 5 months (without any compensation either, as it seems to matter). Actually, before that, we even created the testnet (notably with the great coordination of @Tor Paulsen). During those 5 months we experimented a lot with the testnet, crashed it, played with the APIs, did the first brain-swaps ever performed in the wild, figured out what are the important metrics to monitor etc. So when teams join the testnest one week before the application deadline, some people naturally raise eyebrows as we know it is unlikely you get enough experience in such a short time (not suggesting that it is necessary to run for 5 months on the testnet either).

Of course that does not invalidate in any way all the good other aspects of the applications, and I also understand why you wish we are not so obtuse with the technical part. But being an ANO is a technical position first, it's just a plain simple fact.
Thanks @Paul Bernier. We have no problem with the Standing Parties being “obtuse” about the technicals. ANOs job above and beyond all else is running the network. Period.

We’ve been on the testnet for about a month, but (I can only assume) bc of the testnet admin changeover we have not been added to the Authority Set yet. We’re working with the new testnet admin but this is out of our hands. We’re ready to practice brainswaps w our top candidate immediately and anxious to do so so we can introduce him to the community and put this final concern to rest.

If there’s any questions for him please ask now. He’s happy to jump on and answer.
I'm not denying anything you're saying Paul but I wouldn't make it so much bigger than it is either (the technical). It can be handled by a tech hire/addition to your team, that's a plain simple fact as well.

Are you foregoing the big picture in favor of this? Look at what this person and their team can do for the growth of the protocol. I wouldn't take it for granted. It will decide our fate, the tech will be built either way.
On our way to 65 ANOs, we need to sometimes look at things on a case by case basis. This is our chance to "growthack" our success and take calculated risks.

At a time where you need penetration and growth , doing some concessions (mental) for a pure growth play can be a tremendous thing for business.

We're a community, like a family. We should make sure to help and share our skills with the people that have showed willingness and strength. We want diversity and different ways of thinking. This is how we will become a beast.
In other words this community should be giving many hands to this team. Like we've done previously to other ANOs but this time look at how proven this team is :)