[Constitutional] AIP: Security Council Election Process Improvements

[Arbitrum]

@krst

While the proposed changes are welcome, and we are generally supportive of them, we believe that there is much more room for improvement. This proposal is a great opportunity to discuss other aspects of the election process and of the Security Council itself, and hopefully introduce some additional changes. If we are to go through a constitutional vote, it seems prudent to have a proper retrospective and debate in the DAO so as not to have to go through the process again for additional things in the future — things that could have been included already.

Such a debate began after the OpenZeppelin’s ARDC report on Arbitrum Security Council Recommendations, but hasn’t been picked up by the Foundation or any other AAEs. The report outlined many recommendations for improving the election process. We don’t see this work referenced anywhere in this proposal. During both open and private discussions following the report, many other ideas were surfaced that deserve at least thoughtful consideration.

Thank you to @seedgov and @krst for highlighting the need to discuss how to enhance the candidate pool for future elections, improve the Security Council’s operations, and strengthen other off-chain aspects of the Security Council election process, as well as other topics identified in OpenZeppelin’s Arbitrum Security Council Recommendations. We agree it is important to address these broader topics and that now is a good time to do so. However, we consider most of these topics to be outside the scope of this proposal, as they would not impact the constitution nor the Security Council election smart contracts and therefore would not need to be voted on. Accordingly, we have created a separate thread on the forum to discuss these higher-level topics separately, but in parallel with this proposal.