I will be voting “For” on snapshot as ultimately I think we really need to get some type of treasury management process in place. While I have some operational disagreements, I think at it’s core the proposal makes sense.
Before the Tally vote, I would like to see this question addressed however. Maybe I’m on an island with this… but I’m not really sure how the DAO voting on ETH investments is going to work if the Growth group is short-term focused
However, I think I’m still in the ‘agree to disagree’ camp here, but maybe more explanation would help. Is the expectation of Growth group a more long-term approach or short-term one? If the plan is to drop the ETH somewhere and let it sit for a year then I think this isn’t as big of a deal… but if the DAO is going to have to have constant snapshot votes because we’re putting 1000 ETH in protocol abc this month and then half the ETH is sold off to go into protocol xyz the next month and then 100 ETH a week is going into protocol 3… and so on… I think you run into those risks I noted before.
And the more I think about it, from a delegate perspective that seems to open the project up to issues with voter fatigue and conflict of interest concerns.
Edit: To save forum space, I’m editing to indicate I will maintain my “for” vote on tally. I would of liked my question addressed, but it’s realtively minor and ultiamtely I think this proposal is good for the DAO as stated in this and prior posts.