@Cp0x, thank you for acknowledging your potential conflict of interest.
You’ve voiced your lack of support half a dozen or so times. It’s been noted and each time we’ve attempted to explain the proposal to you. There isn’t much more we can offer you other than the fact that providing a voice to those who don’t have one is a) good b) not taking a voice away from anyone else especially given it’s a public good available to everyone.
Your proposal presents an interesting challenge to traditional notions of earned influence in DAOs.
Thank you!
Prior to the proposal we ran a very small test case at no cost to the DAO. With $40K in delegation we see about 30 voters per proposal showing ~$1,333 in individual voice incentives participation. This was all with a very small delegation to offer. Assuming similar conversion the public pool could attract, onboard and retain ~2625 individual retail voters (importantly, each with meaningful say). Total votes is cumulative as detailed in the proposal. But importantly, should this proposal garner the same level of support as the Snapshot, this would mark a clear before and after, as such extrapolating from prior data is likely not prudent nor the mark of good epistemics. This is why this proposal is set for a 1 year experiment.
Once more, cp0x and McFly your jointly shared and voiced opinion has been noted. In the interest of avoiding running in more circles via text, we will be hosting a public call in September.