Thanks coinflip for posting the clarification and nipping this in the bud!
I do believe that asking LTIPP council members to vote after they have already declared a conflict of interest is not wise and asking for trouble , as has been the case even predating my tweet, with Synthetix and their supporters first raising the issue.
It is one thing for delegates to vote in support of a proposal rejected by the council, and another to say it was a hung council due to conflict of interest so you exercise your own judgment here.
I fully trust you as a high integrity person! Only sharing this in the spirit of procedural improvements to the process that can minimize allegations like we saw for this case. After all, as Machiavellie said it is important not only to be just but also appear to be just
Here are some options to consider for future tie-breakers;
Program manager or facilitator (@Matt_StableLab ) has a tie-breaking vote, as we are planning to do with the STEP proposal if it is needed
Application advisors get a vote in case of a tie
The DAO is informed there is a hung jury so they need to exercise their own judgment in this particular case
Either of the 3 options are better than asking council members to vote after they have declared a CoI. I do understand how in the heat of the moment and quickness of things these matters werenāt fully considered, but hoping for improvements next time!
Sharing the names of these projects would be appreciated so those who wish to can vote independently on these edge cases knowing the council was hung. Speaking for me personally, i would not vote against the councils recommendation but if i knew it was a hung jury then i would exercise my own decision making.
We (Lampros Labs DAO) have created a live voting dashboard for LTIPP to track the voting of all 77 protocols in real-time.
This dashboard provides info about all the applicationās snapshot voting links, forum proposal application links, asks and live voting statuses for each proposal, all in one accessible dashboard.
Delegates can personalize the dashboard for them by creating a copy of the sheet, allowing them to update the status of voted proposals in the last column of the dashboard and see dynamic changes in cell background colours for the first four columns to track their own votes. (P.S. - Please note that while personal copies enable personalization, the sheet will not be updated for personal copies, the main public link remains active and is updated every 5 minutes for all community members.)
I would love to receive feedback, suggestions or any changes you would like to look into this sheet.
This sheet was completely inspired by the Voting Dashboard created by Inspex for STIP.
And lastly thanks to Applicant advisors and Council members for working tirelessly for the past few weeks to bring the best applications up for voting.
Check out the dashboard from the below link and do share your feedback for the dashboard.
@thedevanshmehta thank you for the feedback and i agree that as the DAO prepares for what ever the long term / continuous / future program is we can and should continue to refine these concepts.
Think its fair to say these protocols will have some form of opportunity to still come to the DAO to seek support as well.
I just finished voting on all the LTIPP proposals and wanted to share my feedback on the process
First I want to thank the council, advisors & program manager for being so transparent and doing a really phenomenal job. I loved how each snapshot contained the feedback from various council members so i could vote according to the one I agreed with most
In terms of developing an optimistic governance module for LTIPP approval, hereās some thoughts from a voter on what is like;
When applications were unanimous in their recommendation, I didnāt read and just voted for
If there was even one dissent, I read all the reviewer comments.
In cases of dissent, i voted according to the recommendation from @GFXlabs , primarily because I identified with their conservative mindset
To automate the process, Iād need to click on an option where I vote for in all council recommended projects without a dissent. If there is a dissent, I choose to the council member whose opinion i would follow. I then get to see all pending proposals where there is a dissent and my chosen council member has not participated in that particular review. I can either tackle those manually (which is what I did) or choose my next in order council member.
Hope this is helpful feedback ! I want to again commend all those involved in the program, it really sets a high bar for how programs in arbitrum should be conducted !
Congratulations to all of the protocols that passed the LTIPP Council Recommended snapshot votes! I will be contacting you all shortly to help facilitate the start of the compliance period.
We know there have been many questions regarding the process for LTIPP applicants who did not make it to a Council Recommended snapshot vote. The council, advisors, and I have been discussing exactly how to handle this process. We will be releasing more information and guidelines tomorrow on how these applicants can go about being included in the program as well as our plans for future incentive programs. Stay tuned!
