VOTING RATIONALE:
Voting Rationale:
I voted against this proposal because, while I understand the potential benefits of shielded voting in certain scenarios, I believe that it may undermine the transparency and engagement that are crucial to the effective functioning of our DAO.
-
Transparency: Public voting allows for real-time accountability, enabling the community to see how delegates are voting and why. This transparency is essential for maintaining trust and ensuring that decisions reflect the will of the broader community.
-
Participation Concerns: There is a significant risk that shielded voting could reduce overall participation, as evidenced by the Aave DAO experiment. Lower participation could weaken the legitimacy of our decisions and reduce the diversity of opinions represented in the final vote.
-
Importance of Signaling: Public voting provides valuable signals to the community, helping voters make informed decisions based on the rationale of others. Shielded voting could suppress this important discourse, leading to less informed voting and potentially poorer decision outcomes.
-
Flexibility over Default: I believe that while shielded voting might be useful in specific cases, such as highly politicized elections, it should not be the default setting for all Snapshot votes. Instead, we should maintain flexibility and allow proposal authors to decide when shielded voting is appropriate.
In summary, while shielded voting has its merits, I believe the risks associated with its broad implementation outweigh the potential benefits, leading me to vote against this proposal.
See Commenting Rationale: Should the DAO Default to using Shielded Voting for Snapshot Votes? - #60 by AlexLumley