ENS name: spencecoin.eth
My reasons for wanting to be a delegate:
I’d like to be an ENS delegate because I’ve observed governance for years in this industry and have participated but not to the fullest extent. Most of the governance in this space has been for DeFi-related things and I’m not generally well-versed on deep financial mechanics and didn’t feel like I knew enough to contribute. I feel the opposite with ENS.
I’m bullish on ENS. I’m a user, I’m tapped into the space, and I understand why having decentralized, human-readable namespaces is imperative for adoption.
I’m bullish, however I’m not a blind bull. Having an ENS name, while extremely useful, comes with privacy and anonymity considerations. I have oftentimes been a proponent of using ENS in a healthy manner and promoting good security hygiene, of which I may have more opportunities to do if I’m a delegate.
Lastly, I understand what it means to introduce a token to a community. I understand the greed that can come with it and the blaring noise that’s introduced by all the token holders who only care about the price, and only care about introducing or voting on governance proposals that have the potential to increase their bottom line. I believe I can steer things away from that, and in the right direction.
TL;DR: ENS is something I feel I have a deep understanding of and I believe that being a delegate will result in positive outcomes - not only for the protocol but for myself with a new, unique experience!
My view on each section of the proposed ENS Constitution 828:
- Name ownership is an absolute right:
Agree. Anything else would go against the nature of decentralization.
- Registration fees exist as an incentive mechanism:
Agree. “Incentive” may not be the best word, as it’s an incentive to not speculate - it’s more of an anti-incentive. It may be better to refer to registration fees as economic mechanisms (positive mechanism for ENS DAO in terms of funding, positive mechanism for regulation and discouraging speculation).
RE: what is/isn’t permissible: In general, the fewer times that the price is changed at all, the better. However, if/when prices are changed, it should always be a sweeping change for all.
- Income funds ENS and other public goods:
Agree. The long-term viability of ENS is of course the primary goal, and beyond that, the goal should be to enable other open-source builders and public goods to provide more beneficial protocols to the Ethereum industry.
- ENS Integrates with the global namespace:
Agree. As long as decentralization isn’t compromised, full speed ahead.
My web3 qualifications / skills:
I’ve been working in Ethereum since early 2017 (full time since late 2017) at MEW/MyCrypto - coming up on five years pretty soon, which feels like a lifetime.
I bought ENS domains the day that the protocol launched in May 2017.
I’ve worked for projects that integrated ENS extremely early (MEW/MyCrypto might have even been the first) and I’ve been friends with many of the ENS team for years.
Lastly, I’m not a developer, I’m a communicator.