RFC: Create a Standardized Guideline for Non-Security Council Elections

ehy chiming in cause as posted by @Bob-Rossi we had this discussion together and I helped him with some oversight on what was needed.

I think there is a merit in breaking down in snapshot point by point (assuming, snapshot can’t handle a case like this which seems like the case). Totally fine with that.

In general tho, topic 1, 2, 3 are all part in my opinion of the same basket of “good habits” on how the dao should vote. I would even dare to say, this discussion is complementary to the one currently live about self voting. So yes, let’s discuss. And eventually let’s make separate votes. But, let’s keep in mind the big picture: it’s all about make election smoother, fairier and more standardised.

That said

  • topic 1 (voting mechanism): there could be a different approach maybe. Something like: standard way of voting should be X. But, if a proposal writer thinks there should be another mechanism of voting, it should be well articulated in the proposal. We leave the liberty to move into something else, but also, we should be aware that it would be more of an exception than anything. This all stands on the fact that we hope proposers, and also commentators, will be mature enough to understand that 99 out of 100 respecting the rules is +ve for the dao
  • topic 2: nothing to add. It should be consistent. Again tho, would personally lean toward “shutter”, with exception possibilty as per the above if any.
  • topic 3: is a numerical question more than a mechanism one. Bob studied previous elections, in the end we need to guarantee that for every election there is at least a certain amount of people, more than the spots available. So, numbers are up for discussion.
3 Likes