Aid Proposal for Earthquake Survivors in Türkiye
On 02.06.2023, two catastrophic earthquakes with a magnitude of 7.6 and 7.8 occurred in the Kahramanmaraş in Turkey. In addition to Kahramanmaraş, many earthquakes and aftershocks were experienced in Adıyaman, Kilis, Şanlıurfa, Diyarbakır, Adana, Osmaniye, Gaziantep, Malatya and Hatay. According to the statement made by Japanese earthquake expert Shinji Toda, “We can say that the Kahramanmaraş earthquake is the largest earthquake in the world to have occurred on land. 6207 buildings were destroyed, and many buildings became unusable. More than 13 million people are affected. According to the statement made on February 9, the loss of life is 17406 and the number of injured is 71806. We need the support of many people from all over the world in this catastrophic event, which has been declared a Level 3 Emergency by the World Health Organization. Although it is a great humanitarian need, we are aware that this proposal puts a great burden on all voters and may put them in a dilemma, but we had to take such route due to the urgency of the situation. In addition to being a support that prevents great pain, this proposal unfortunately opens a door for opportunistic people to use it…
Excerpt (1199 of 2797 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗
Hi, thanks for this post and opening up a sport on the forum to discuss this.
Congratulations on the passing of your proposal. It would be great for the community to be able to follow along with updates about what happens next now that the proposal has passed. Accountability and feedback is an important part of the process, and I’m sure the community would be glad to know that these funds are being put to good use.
*Edit: https://twitter.com/CryptoCakir/status/1629248402109222913
I will be wholeheartedly shocked if there is any form of verifiable accountability offered for what happened to the 20,000 ATOM and the money it provided following the approval of this proposal.
This is, in my opinion, a black stain on the project. As we can already see, multiple scam attempts have been made and are in the process of being made after onlookers observed how simple it was to get a cash payout from the Cosmos governance system.
We need a new proposal to keep anything that isn’t 100% related to the technical functioning of the Cosmos system off of governance. With charities in particular, there are many ways to go about receiving donations that do not have such a negative impact.
The entire process should be documented, tweets with text are not enough. twitter.com CryptoCakir | Validator ⚛️ @CryptoCakir News regarding Prop. 101 ⚛️ "One of the streets of the 34.500 m2 living center to be built in the Hatay region will be named “COSMOS” Spending reports will be provided from @ihtiyacharitasi to increase the transparency. Here is the Medium article: medium.com/@0xwilds/en-ai… twitter.com/CryptoCakir/st… CryptoCakir | Validator ⚛️ @CryptoCakir Cosmos Hub Prop 101 passed ✅ Funds directly transferred to the multisig. With the help of @ihtiyacharitasi it will be used to help the affected people in Türkiye Syria. There will be a medium article in the following days. Thanks for everyone who helped supported us 🙏🏽 https://t.co/DXgIdNpsDa 11:35 AM - 2 Mar 2023 25 9 Balance sheet and pictures (materials, local impact etc…) would be amazing. I also think that as of right now, it is a stain. You don’t let 200K+ sit for a month, either money is not between the right hand or some sort of spending has been done (then cosmonauts needs proof). @Kam @Imperator.co That would be…
Excerpt (1198 of 1273 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗
Hi, Nova_Ratio.
With all sincerity, I do hope the passing of this proposal provided the much needed financial support in providing aid to the people affected in Turkey.
I’d like to bring this topic (Prop #101) back up for discussion, especially noting there hasn’t been a response to this thread.
Looking into the recipient wallet, looks like the funds are still there, with >250+ pages of tx since the passing of this prop, and the original ask of 200k ATOM (now 200,617.98) remaining.
Within the current climate of the Cosmos Hub CP, I do believe it is important to revisit topics such as this especially, again, noting there doesn’t seem to have been an update since Feb/Mar '23 - unless I am mistaken (which I do hope is the case!)
ephemeral_25:@Kam @Imperator.co That would be a wonderful topic to raise next time you hop on an interview about Cosmos.
Looking at the current Cosmos Hub validator set, will be anticipating hearing from
the 22nd ranked! @Imperator.co
To the broader Hub staking community.
Would it be immoral to propose a “clawback” for this original proposal or reallocate the funds? Feb 23, 2023 was when this prop passed and despite being unsure if there was any amount staked during that time frame, this wallet has ATOM sitting idle currently.
@Imperator.co Would love to hear a response, respectfully!
i agree with this proposition, a clowback is needed
Charity doesn’t belong in the governance proposal of a fintech blockchain project. You are not immoral in the least. If the funds were needed bad enough they would of immediately sold the ATOM for the “aid”. I sold as soon as I saw this proposal. The price of atom dumped right after this proposal. What would of been worth $300k in “aid” is now worth $100k. This type of stuff is why no one trusts these chains, ATOM especially. This proposal passed with %7.03 of delegated atom voting yes… At the time the supply was 348.84 million and it took 25.8 million to get this passed. This is so blatantly stupid that I sell the top every time on atom. I am raking everyone over the coals and I don’t want to be. If I’m doing it as a user imagine what people on the inside are doing. Make a fn charity chain if you want to do charity. Fix the brain dead 40% quorum. Penalize validators for not voting. Baba bing bada boom you have a functioning society that is incentivized to vote, get involved, pay atention. Oh, oh, but, wait, wait a second, if that happened the devs and insiders wouldn’t be able to drain the fk out of this meme token. It’s a fn meme people ATOM//cosmos what ever you want to call it…
Excerpt (1199 of 1221 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗
Not immoral at all, get the money back, it’s not like we can afford to squander the remaining atoms even more
The funds were meant to be spent for the welfare of the earthquake survivors. I don’t recall anything like differed spending in the original prop. but if the funds haven’t been used for the purpose it should be send to CP.
If they haven’t spent it, i’d agree that it needs to be returned at this point. Suggest tagging them on Twitter. It appears they are not responding here.
It shouldn’t have passed. Extreme majority abstained to avoid backlash in either direction, and the Yes votes were barely more than the No’s. Hardly what i’d call conclusive results.
I’d like to give benefit of the doubt that the intentions behind passing this prop were solely good, but fully agreed the Cosmos Hub CP should not be a utilized for charity/miscellaneous money grab opportunities. At the very least, we are able to see which validators played part in favoring the outcome.
Thank you, to the participating Cosmos Hub community, for sharing your time & feedback. Will email the Imperator val and report back as the initial step forward.
S’ils ne l’ont pas encore utilisé, c’est qu’ils n’en n’ont pas l’utilité. Les étiqueter sur twitter maintenant, leur feraient utiliser ces fonds potentiellement pour une autre cause.
Thank you @Guinch_Roze, your logic makes sense.
Edit: Though giving benefit of the doubt they are trustworthy actors, and believing we should provide time to justly respond here with the nudge, will refrain for the time being.
Guinch_Roze:S’ils ne l’ont pas encore utilisé, c’est qu’ils n’en n’ont pas l’utilité. Les étiqueter sur twitter maintenant, leur feraient utiliser ces fonds potentiellement pour une autre cause.
Doubt that. That would be a terrible look to hold it for this long then re-use the funds for something else after social pressure.
Hello.
Hope all of you are well and enjoyed your weekend.
The recipient wallet continues to be active (RE rewards), with 213,498.2 ATOM sitting idle. It seems @Imperator.co is fully aware this proposal was a misuse of governance and CP spending, which can be honorable, but intrigued to see a lack of response here, even after 12 days since reinitiating this thread.
If you have their response in any form, we should do our civic duty to post it on-chain.
we can already concider we have not the waited response. bring it onchain 
Copy/Paste:
Wishing all of you well.
In light of recent events RE @ATOMAcceleratorDAO, it has come to my attention that Dilan Asatekin, Founder of @Imperator, is listed as being part of the DAO “Review” team.
Politely, and respectfully, requesting:
@ATOMAcceleratorDAO
@neshtedle (Review Committee Member)
@Mikey_Lee (Review Committee Member)
ping Dilan to respond to this post to provide the community clarity on Prop#101, please.
Though it still remains unclear whether or not this is a CEX address (cosmos1dm68mx9jcsyqkyzp3up7gmnu3ku84v8gf6v75u), according to Mintscan, the wallet where funds were transferred to now holds 227,495.16 IDLE ATOM.
Thank you, kindly.
EDIT
Hi, @Cosmos_Nanny. I understand you are busy with other tasks, which hold priority, but would you mind pinging Reviewer, Dilan Asatekin, when you have a chance? Thank you!
Hi there, Dilan left AADAO earlier this year, March 2024. Mikey’s contribution ended with the pilot year. Current and former AADAO contributors lists available here: github.com gaiaus/aadao/blob/main/team/README.md ``` # Current & Former Contributors: Core DAO & Oversight Committee Please be advised that the titles and designations of contributors and SubDAO members have evolved throughout the course of the DAO's development. This roster representation is organized chronologically, starting with the current members and moving backward to previous contributors. ## Current Contributors ### [Better Future](https://x.com/BetterCio) **Grant subDAO, Strategy Committee**, 100% FTE Co-founder of AADAO with a background in finance, BD, marketing, engineering management, R&D, seed investing, grants, and strategy. Doctorate from Stanford University. Better is a member of our Strategy and Operations Committees. ### [Syed Choudhury](https://x.com/syedchoudhury?t=g-ANEWbJe3eP0FV4ka0crw&s=09) **Marketing subDAO Lead**, 100% FTE Former Head of Communications at the [Interchain Foundation](https://interchain.io/). MarComms Specialist with over 18 years in the field.…
Excerpt (1199 of 1380 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗
Thank you for your response, providing the clarification/update and being willing to reach out. You are appreciated!
After recently discovering Dilan A. served as part of the Reviewer Committee, tagging AADAO/Mikey/Reena was simply an attempt to contact the individual.
Respectfully,
@ATOMAcceleratorDAO As a collective, has there been no success in being able to reach Imperator’s founder to provide a response here to the broader Cosmos Hub community?
@Provalidator Would the team be able to provide any assistance as well?
I can only appreciate your ongoing effort to conclude the topic. 
Thank you for your time and support reading through this effort. We are in this together.
Long live the Cosmos Hub.