Hey Wil super nice to read this, and even nicer that you’re the one bringing it up.
While I don’t usually engage with the governance discussion on Celo, I’m not aware of the content of the conflict, but I feel it in the air.
I’ve been working around the Celo ecosystem since 2022, when I co-founded ReFi Spring with friends, and since then, I have contributed to different projects building on Celo (and even brought Blockchain na Escola to build on Celo, and that generated super nice numbers that the team currently leading the project already shared.
I’ve been following discussions by OGs about how to further promote efficiency (in all senses) within the ecosystem, but all discussions shared the same feature of happening under one silo, not a general and open discussion.
I share your vision that before accelerating (and I think the combo of MiniPay + Self + Mento will work as jet fuel for the ecosystem), we need to clear the air.
While I don’t know how to engage in the discussion, I’m fully available and willing to join the call to contribute as I can.
Thanks for showing up.
We spent 2 hours on Zoom. No one was named or doxxed. The tone was respectful, mature, and focused on Celo’s success. Celo appreciation: majority of participants started their shares with a deep appreciation for Celo and a desire to grow together and succeed.
What we heard (concerns surfaced)
Financial integrity: worries about possible embezzlement/misuse and the need to verify with facts.
Validator changes: fear that dropping validators could harm reliability, community investment, and trust.
Conflicts of interest: questions about cross-directorships, self-funding, and unclear roles.
Centralization & safety to speak: concern that power is concentrating and that raising issues might carry social or funding risk.
What we aligned on (direction of travel)
Independent audits: initiate a neutral review that can flag any past misuse and confirm clean practices going forward.
Clear cultural pact: publish simple standards (eg, disclose conflicts; no allocating to projects you own or receive from without recusal; right-of-reply; transparent comms).
Public accountability dashboard: show flows of funds (grants in/out), high-level metrics, and incident/post-mortem summaries—no sensitive data, just clarity.
Celo Season 2 pacing: consider focusing the next “season” first on housekeeping (Bus maintenance) before expanding new programs, so we fix pipes while keeping essential work running.
Immediate next steps (proposed)
Draft the Cultural & COI Pact (one pager) → share on forum for comments.
Scope an Independent Audit (terms, timeline, budget, reviewer shortlist) → bring to a temperature-check vote.
Prototype the Dashboard (what data, how often, who updates) → post a mockup for feedback.
Validator change impact note → collect inputs from validators/RPCs on possible effects before any binding vote.
Gratitude to everyone who showed up with care. Let’s keep the tone we set tonight: facts over labels, remedies over blame, and steady steps that make Celo stronger.
—–
On a personal note I want to move move Celo from a grant-and-gatekeeping culture to a reciprocity model: seed pooled commitments (cash, goods, services) that communities swap (borrow) under public rules (clear prices/indices, caps and circuit breakers , and auditable ledgers with simple grievance paths) so TVL increases and value circulates without favoritism, or rumor.
Instead of one-off distributions, fund endowment-like pools that keep working after programs end; require local stewardship , right-of-reply, and transparency dashboards showing inflows/outflows and redemptions; design forgiveness/fee waivers for the most vulnerable; and enable routing between RWA liquidity pools.
In short: rules over rulers, receipts over rumors, and enduring community credit that keeps neighbors whole.
Thank you @WillRuddick and everyone for showing up and discussing the urgent issue of financial integrity and best practices.
I strongly believe that one reason the Celo price is down is because of an increasing crisis of trust within and outside the community regarding how outward-facing programs are managed and funded.
I know that @mbarbosa and several others are working on important transparency dashboards to visualize past transaction and funding graphs. The preliminary data already raises uncomfortable questions, and I believe, once ready, their critical work will help us establish clear community standards and a cultural pact.
I agree that Celo Season 2 should focus on housekeeping and retrospective analysis before approving further funds from our depleting community treasury. Specifically, we need:
An independent audit of existing fund flows
Clear accountability frameworks before any new capital deployment
If supported by the Celo Foundation, I would strongly propose @WillRuddick and Grassroots Economics (GE) to lead the Celo Housekeeping effort for Season 2. I personally believe that GE has consistently demonstrated the highest standards of integrity in our ecosystem, making them ideal stewards for this critical work. I would also love to see support and funding for @mbarbosa and others’ important transparency infrastructure work.