Well, you certainly caught me off guard there, Vortac. Here I was expecting a productive interaction about the criticisms raised; Not an outright condescending dismissal of every single thing I've taken the time to write here. Boring and incomprehensible... really?
Do you not even have a response as to your proposal's total lack of rules, guidelines and governance structures that these elected roles should be bound by? As both the creator of the proposal, and a candidate of it, don't you think you should have been even more diligent in ensuring such matters were hashed out?
Honestly, I'm really taken aback by your insulting response. Questions and criticisms should be expected and welcomed, not marginalized. Where previously I was fairly neutral towards your candidacy, that kind of attitude now has me questioning your suitability for it. Accountability is everything.
You were so neutral, you voted against two days ago, before even posting this article? You do realize it's recorded on the blockchain? But, voting against is your right - that's why I have created the poll in the first place.
My more detailed response is posted on Slack.
Let's not conflate my opinion of your proposed Twitter management structure with my opinion of your role in it. I already knew that I disagreed with the proposal, so I voted "No" before posting about it. That much is true.
But I actually had no opinion one way or the other about your proposed role in it until you made that arrogant, dismissive remark yesterday. That's where my opinion of you got a bit more colour.