CIP 0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted Operators
- Hello,Please find the CIP-0050 open for discussion at the PR https://github.com/global-synchronizer-foundation/cips/pull/39In order to move to a vote we are requesting a Super Validator to sponsor the CIP and a second Super Validator to endorse the CIP.Any SV sponsors/endorses or changes needed?Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management - toggle quoted message Show quoted textI see no reason for this to be a CIPThe Tokenomics committee is currently responsible for designating approved new Validators to the Network and we were discussing how the committee would modify its process of decision making going forwardThe clarification being proposed at the Tokenomics Committee is...1. If someone is joining the network as a new Validator operator then the committee will continue to vet those applications on a case by case basis2. If someone is joining the network via an existing Validator operator, then there is no need for the committee to vet those applicants, the operator can choose to support its customers as it sees fitThe only caveat to #2 is that we are still working on a measured roll out so the committee is recommending that we extend each operator the ability to add 10 Validators at any time and then come back to the group to make sure not growing too quicklyOn Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 8:17 AM DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...> wrote:Hello,Please find the CIP-0050 open for discussion at the PR https://github.com/global-synchronizer-foundation/cips/pull/39In order to move to a vote we are requesting a Super Validator to sponsor the CIP and a second Super Validator to endorse the CIP.Any SV sponsors/endorses or changes needed?Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator - toggle quoted message Show quoted textI would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the formoperators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they arewhitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinionOn Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted textHello,We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?Thanks,Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program ManagementOn Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the formoperators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they arewhitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinionOn Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted text
Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted textHello,In discussing this rather than have personal emails on the form we will generate an alias that will send the email to the contacts you want. This will protect your email while still getting the information.Please see how this is done with MPCH on the form. Let me know if you would like your information there as well!Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program ManagementOn Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:55 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted text
That is a fantastic idea. Thank you for that.
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 9:54 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
In discussing this rather than have personal emails on the form we will generate an alias that will send the email to the contacts you want. This will protect your email while still getting the information.
Please see how this is done with MPCH on the form. Let me know if you would like your information there as well!
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:55 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted textHi Amanda can you please include Proof Group here as well:Proof Group and we can use my email of chris@...On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:54 AM DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...> wrote:Hello,In discussing this rather than have personal emails on the form we will generate an alias that will send the email to the contacts you want. This will protect your email while still getting the information.Please see how this is done with MPCH on the form. Let me know if you would like your information there as well!Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program ManagementOn Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:55 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted textThanks Amanda, this is a great idea and we would like our information in that format as well.
Christopher Kelly
Head of Business Development | Americas
IntellectEU
Digital Finance & Emerging Technologies
+1 215-962-3419
IMPORTANT! This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 9:56 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:That is a fantastic idea. Thank you for that.
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 9:54 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
In discussing this rather than have personal emails on the form we will generate an alias that will send the email to the contacts you want. This will protect your email while still getting the information.
Please see how this is done with MPCH on the form. Let me know if you would like your information there as well!
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:55 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:
Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted textHi Amanda - IntellectEU would like to participate as well. Please add christopher.kelly@... and jonathan.mayeur@...Thanks,Chris
Christopher Kelly
Head of Business Development | Americas
IntellectEU
Digital Finance & Emerging Technologies
+1 215-962-3419
IMPORTANT! This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:55 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted text
C7 would also like to participate.
Could you register pinar@... and sophia@...
Thank you!
Veronica
V E R O N I C A A U G U S T S S O N
/
P A R T N E R
7RIDGE IS A PRIVATE MARKETS ASSET MANAGER INVESTED IN TRANSFORMATIVE TECHNOLOGY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES TO POWER THE GLOBAL ECONOMY
Signature for V e r o n i c a A u g u s t s s o n
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> On Behalf Of Chris Kelly via lists.sync.global
Sent: Wednesday, 12 March 2025 14:46
To: cip-discuss@...
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHi Amanda - IntellectEU would like to participate as well. Please add christopher.kelly@... and jonathan.mayeur@...
Thanks,
Chris
Christopher Kelly
Head of Business Development | Americas
IntellectEU
Digital Finance & Emerging Technologies
+1 215-962-3419
IMPORTANT! This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:55 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:
Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted text
Obsidian Systems would also like to participate. ryan.trinkle@... nathan.homesley@...
On 3/13/25 08:04, Veronica Augustsson via lists.sync.global wrote:
C7 would also like to participate.
Could you register pinar@... and sophia@...
Thank you!
Veronica
V E R O N I C A A U G U S T S S O N
/
P A R T N E R
7RIDGE IS A PRIVATE MARKETS ASSET MANAGER INVESTED IN TRANSFORMATIVE TECHNOLOGY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES TO POWER THE GLOBAL ECONOMY
Signature for V e r o n i c a A u g u s t s s o n
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> On Behalf Of Chris Kelly via lists.sync.global
Sent: Wednesday, 12 March 2025 14:46
To: cip-discuss@...
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHi Amanda - IntellectEU would like to participate as well. Please add christopher.kelly@... and jonathan.mayeur@...
Thanks,
Chris
Christopher Kelly
Head of Business Development | Americas
IntellectEU
Digital Finance & Emerging Technologies
+1 215-962-3419
IMPORTANT! This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:55 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:
Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP 0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted textHi All,Regarding this CIP, I wanted to get some clarification on Lines 20-23 that state the following:20. Existing Validator operators will be authorized to create up to 10 additional Validators for third-party participants.21. Third-party applicants wishing to run a Validator will be redirected to an existing operator22. Pre-approved operators, such as Kiln, will retain their prior allocations (e.g., 30 Validators).23. Operators such as IEU, MPCH, Proof Group, and others already running their own Validators will be given discretion in onboarding third-party Validators.Does Line 23 mean that IEU, MPCH and Proof Group can onboard as many third-party validators as they see fit based on their discretion or would they only be authorized to create up to 10 additional Validators for third parties as mentioned in Line 20 for existing operators? If it's the former, then I would suggest that we make this distinction of "Featured Validator Operators" that have the ability to onboard unlimited third-party validators at their discretion, noting that Featured status can be granted after a proven history of effectively running validators.Thanks,Chris
Christopher Kelly
Head of Business Development | Americas
IntellectEU
Digital Finance & Emerging Technologies
+1 215-962-3419
IMPORTANT! This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 4:28 PM Ryan Trinkle via lists.sync.global <ryan.trinkle=obsidian.systems@...> wrote:Obsidian Systems would also like to participate. ryan.trinkle@... nathan.homesley@...
On 3/13/25 08:04, Veronica Augustsson via lists.sync.global wrote:
C7 would also like to participate.
Could you register pinar@... and sophia@...
Thank you!
Veronica
V E R O N I C A A U G U S T S S O N
/
P A R T N E R
7RIDGE IS A PRIVATE MARKETS ASSET MANAGER INVESTED IN TRANSFORMATIVE TECHNOLOGY FOR FINANCIAL SERVICES TO POWER THE GLOBAL ECONOMY
Signature for V e r o n i c a A u g u s t s s o n
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> On Behalf Of Chris Kelly via lists.sync.global
Sent: Wednesday, 12 March 2025 14:46
To: cip-discuss@...
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHi Amanda - IntellectEU would like to participate as well. Please add christopher.kelly@... and jonathan.mayeur@...
Thanks,
Chris
Christopher Kelly
Head of Business Development | Americas
IntellectEU
Digital Finance & Emerging Technologies
+1 215-962-3419
IMPORTANT! This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:55 AM Kinga Bosse via lists.sync.global <kinga.bosse=mpch.com@...> wrote:
Hi Amanda – MPCH would like to participate – kinga.bosse@..., milo.smith@..., matt.mareane@...
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 8:43 AM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP 0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsHello,
We should give contact information at the top of the form for all the existing operators interested in running for others.
Can I get that contact information to add for those interested?
Thanks,
Dr. Amanda L. Martin
814-359-6544Director of Program Management
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
I would think 1 form is enough explaining at the top that it's only an application for new operators and listing contact information for existing operators they can reach out to instead of filling out the form
operators can onboard whoever they would like, the other operators in the network don't need to know who they are
whitelisting will come from the operator, should just go to the GSF SV in my opinion
On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:43 AM Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:
Some questions that it might be useful to clarify:
* Should there be two forms on the GSF website:
one for Validator Operators, and
one for people / organizations seeking an Operator?
Or would it be better to just make clear that the current form is just to request approval as an Operator?
* Can Operators onboard anonymous entities, or will we require unique contact information for the owner / controlling entity of each onboarded node?
* Will all the whitelisting requests come from an approved Validator operators, to the SV that originally sponsored that SV Operator
--
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - These lines were added from the minutes of the Tokenomics committee / working group meeting.
Would a member of the GSF Tokenomics working group / committee like to comment or clarify? - toggle quoted message Show quoted textUp to 10 to begin with and then come back to committee to reup your allotmentWe want to make sure we don't flood the systemOn Mar 18, 2025, at 12:04 PM, Wayne Collier via lists.sync.global <wayne.collier=digitalasset.com@...> wrote:These lines were added from the minutes of the Tokenomics committee / working group meeting.
Would a member of the GSF Tokenomics working group / committee like to comment or clarify?
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - Hello,
We had some great conversation on this CIP. We have updated the CIP based on the feedback here and in the GitHub PR.We are proposing this as a process CIP, not a change in governance. The goal is clarify the process and answer questions publicly to reduce confusion.In order to move to a vote, we are requesting Super Validator Node Owners to sponsor and endorse the CIP.Any SV Node Owners willing to sponsor/endorse, or are other change needed? - toggle quoted message Show quoted textI still see no reason for this to be a CIPI'm not opposed if anyone wants to sponsorOn Mar 19, 2025, at 4:11 PM, DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...> wrote:Hello,
We had some great conversation on this CIP. We have updated the CIP based on the feedback here and in the GitHub PR.We are proposing this as a process CIP, not a change in governance. The goal is clarify the process and answer questions publicly to reduce confusion.In order to move to a vote, we are requesting Super Validator Node Owners to sponsor and endorse the CIP.Any SV Node Owners willing to sponsor/endorse, or are other change needed?
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. - toggle quoted message Show quoted text
From: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...> on behalf of Eric Saraniecki via lists.sync.global <eric=digitalasset.com@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2025 4:29:23 PM
To: cip-discuss@... <cip-discuss@...>
Subject: Re: [cip-discuss] CIP-0050 - Controlled Validator Growth Through Trusted OperatorsI still see no reason for this to be a CIP
I'm not opposed if anyone wants to sponsor
On Mar 19, 2025, at 4:11 PM, DrAmandaLMartin via lists.sync.global <amartin=linuxfoundation.org@...> wrote:
Hello,
We had some great conversation on this CIP. We have updated the CIP based on the feedback here and in the GitHub PR.We are proposing this as a process CIP, not a change in governance. The goal is clarify the process and answer questions publicly to reduce confusion.In order to move to a vote, we are requesting Super Validator Node Owners to sponsor and endorse the CIP.Any SV Node Owners willing to sponsor/endorse, or are other change needed?
This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.digitalasset.com/emaildisclaimer.html. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message.
