Agree, very well written & feels like an improvement is on the way! This is my 1st active participation in a forum proposal, so please go easy on me if there’s any n00b fundamentals I miss as I attempt to gain clarity w/ some questions & commentary…
Might be stating the obvious, but seems pretty clear that #1 & #3 are both untenable…
Re: #1 Outright ban. Does this actually align with the DAO’s purpose & intentions? Or even the concept of a DAO. If I understood the resistance OIP-49/49a correctly, one primary concernn was (govt) over-reach & “what drove ppl to crypto in the first place, looking for an escape”
Put simply: how is an outright ban of anything forever in the future any different than the same over-reach that we are concerned about in the first place?
Seems likely this would have the inverse effect than intended, and really like suppression of speech/ideas.
Last one: If someone were to propose an outright ban on say - bug bounties, or participants from a certain country/heritage - there’s no way that would fly, right?
We’ve probs agreed on the need for change so I’ll skip #3 and move to the double click on #2….
- It seems like a very important point in this thread is “if I’m wrong in the OG OIP, I vow never to post another proposal”.
- Said differently: Are we anti-iteration? Feels like we should welcome amendments & improvements regardless of whether or not we agree w/ the topic of discussion, otherwise how do we get better?
Ried Hoffman famously said “If you are not embarrassed by the first version of your product, you’ve launched too late” & I don’t think that’s too controversial w/r/t launching a Product, and seems applicable to proposals too.
- Would people be willing to accept the conditions of Framework #2 for all proposals in the future?
- If you strip away “charity” and replace with OIP-____ initiatives but keep 95% approval/temp check/# wallets/etc does that feel like a good way to approach proposals & voting?
- If not, I fear that is also a really bad precedent to set.
- Before we vote on any of these, can we try to get more fidelity on what classifies as “cooperative building efforts” & actually put down some KPI ground rules for any investment of DAO funds?
- Put simply: Knowing the goalposts & specific metrics needed to hit (ROI/timeline/voting %/etc) will give all of us a roadmap for effective DAO governance & streamlined processes so we don’t start lagging in innovation.
Worth re-emphasizing to close: I really appreciate this proposal, the concerns that were brought up, the energy behind it & how much I've personally learned about this community in such a short time. I also know that in times of heated debate (duress) are oftentimes when rational long term decision-making from all actors is at highest risk.
So, I’d love if we all could collectively pause, take a deep breath, and continue iterating on something which is very clearly an important topic to many of us.
<3,
Billygoat