For the Tally vote, I will maintain my “For” vote as noted above. I believe the changes listed are reasonable and will enhance the election in relation to it’s current form.
I will re-emphasize that I would like to see “Shuttered” voting explored on Tally for this. I think election results hidden until completion will be a benefit to this process, and if a proposal were to come forward to do so I would be in support of it.
The Princeton Blockchain Club is voting in favor of these changes to the Security Council election process on Tally.
Although we didn’t get around to making a forum post for the Snapshot vote, our rationale remains the same. The introduction of the Contender Submission stage makes the process more fair, and the requirement that candidates need to sign a message with their wallet just makes sense. Audit report looks good as well.
(As a side note: we’re interested in exploring shielded voting onchain as solutions progress.)
The cp0x team voted in favor of this proposal.
We support more competitive elections, which are represented in this change, namely equal opportunities for candidates, rather than who ran first.
We need to start by thanking you for the proposal. We, as ITU Blockchain, agree with the decision to implement a new 7-Day Contender Submission stage before the actual Nominee Selection stage with the purpose of creating a fairer environment. Furthermore, asking Security Council applicants to provide a signed message from their EOAs will be significant in terms of validation for other ArbitrumDao-governed chains. Also, it is quite valuable for the election process to be well-designed, so we support the related changes in the constitution.
On the other hand, since the election will happen in a longer timeline it will need more concentration to handle the process, so we would be happy to be informed about the subsequent changes. All rationales considered, as ITU Blockchain we will vote in favour of this proposal.
Treasure’s Arbitrum Representative Council continued our support of this proposal on Tally aligned with the viewpoint previous expressed in our feedback: