Voting for, for diversification of treasury and exposure to REDD+.

I never really saw questions about double claiming and chain of custody of offset units thoroughly addressed in the other forum (or perhaps I missed it). Are we certain that each unit represents a retired (or burned) carbon credit?

    greevesie just to address this - I listened to the first few minutes of the MOSS AMA and they say that they will be publishing a report of those on-chain retirements so this is good from me!

    Voting for treasury expansion to include $MCO2.

    Generally, I think KlimaDAO should look to qualify and include other on-chain carbon and climate assets as they arise. Given proper due diligence of the tokenized projects, teams, and economics, connection with other high quality assets can strengthen KLIMA's position as the leader of the on-chain carbon market.

    Brian33
    Is it typo in partnership point 2? "50k MCO2" or 1 MCO2 is 10$ currently?

    anyway im down for additional reserve currency, and their AMA yesterday looks good also.
    The partnership offering is also good enough to offer win-win for both of us. LFG!

    In their AMA, MOSS said that they aim to be the Amazon for carbon credits: connecting buyers to sellers. I would rather projects onboard credits themselves without having to cut in some middle man. Blockchain technology is about removing the middle man, not enriching them. I think we should be patient, and wait for more BCT tiers, BITMO, etc before onboarding more niche projects like MOSS.

    I listened to the AMA and read up on MOSS, but still can't claim to fully understand the full implications of this proposal. I'm putting some trust in the smart folks in KLIMA who understand this field much better than I do, that this is the right direction for us. Though as others have mentioned, it would have been beneficial if some of the KLIMA gurus had weighed in with their in-depth review of the pros/cons of this proposal, to help the rest of us make a more informed decision. The AMA was pretty helpful though. Voting FOR.

    CryptoKnight As do I.

    The AMA didn’t help either tbh. It was announced just a few hours in advance and I don’t think some of the more vocal and apparently more educated people questioning this proposal were present. Brian did a good job of relaying some of the questions that had been asked offline but it left no space for follow ups and further discussions.

    The fact that Moss’ CEO disappeared without explanation after a few mins, leaving their CTO alone to offer essentially the same explanations previously given on the forum, was also not very reassuring.

    He made some interesting propositions, but at this time it feels that we are basically “investing” in an idealized future version of Moss and not in the current one. Which is fine, as long as we are aware that that’s the case and we believe the promises being made are not just empty VC-pitching BS.

    That being said, I’m tempted to vote in favour of this proposal. My (extremely) uneducated opinion is that the upsides of diversifying our treasury and potentially attracting more liquidity seem to make up for the risks this might introduce.

    There are other partners out there that I think are more aligned with some of KLIMA’s values, but maybe at this point in time Moss is the best we can have?