I was trying to avoid this political debate, wasting each others time without a proper goal in sight. But I believe you are taking this too far and I need to address few of your concern.
It seems to me that they would only gain monetarily, as that’s the only reason to put yourself on two committees
This is just sad that you think I am putting myself in more than two committee for this, I have no vested interest in Optimism and its true that I spend my significant amount of time here because I like our gov model, I see a working DAO with our two pillar gov model and I want to be a part of it. Anyone following my thoughts on committee knows that I was not in favor of this and because I was afraid that someone will come pointing finger and relating everything that the committee will do to money. This was one of the reason I suggested that instead of giving reward in form of money we should focus on different option. Better option was to put the committee in RPGF. Common problem with greed is that we underestimate it.
Foundation decision to reward the delegate engagement was a good idea and decision to form committee does have some pro and cons which we should discuss at the end of Season 2. Circling back to your comment on mo, its your opinion and I cant do anything about it but to anyone reading this, its true that getting reward for time and contribution will be an added motivation but let me be clear on one thing, I was here when there was no talk about money and I will be here even if foundation choose to remove the money part from coming season. Looking back on Season 1, we have made some progress and there are scope of improvement, second pillar of Gov is expected to be active in upcoming month(s) and I am super excited about it.
And now that I am thinking about it, I also want to mention that its true that there are many delegate in other committee who is more versed than me but I also believe that if we ask the right question at right place to right person and with a learning attitude, we can solve many problems which also include doing valuation of proposals. But even with my limited knowledge, I would encourage you to look into my past review and tell me where did I do wrong, do you find any instance which need improvement, was I biased or aligned in any form ?
Was I selective in nature when doing valuation of proposal in the past? But you know what, Doug, I can say this about you. You did vote on almost all the proposal in the past but choose only to comment and interact with very few of them. Voting in dark is always a red flag in my book and this gives me less confidence in you.
Now that I am part of committee, I want to make it clear that this is my opinion and I am not writing on behalf of my committee. But on that topic, I do believe that combined power of knowledge and interest that my committee can bring on table makes us a suitable candidate to be part of DeFi committee and I was expecting support, in case I need some, from active members like you but I am not sure if I can expect that from you anymore. Rather than focusing on different way to contribute, you are more focused on making sure that my committee does not get final approval. May be you see us as a competition but I still disagree with your approach.
Creating a separate thread and discussing it there would have been a much better approach.
enough bandwidth to handle all proposals
Forgive my french but are you suggesting that I wont have enough bandwidth to review the proposal ? If yes, then I dont know how you can mention this ? Remember in Phase 1 we had close to 30 proposal, in season 1 we had more than 10, in some of them we had 15 How many proposals you expect we get per committee, 5 ? max 10 ? Those are rookie number my friend, given that now we have 3 week, I can review them alone, all of them and I will still have some time to learn new topic if a new proposal comes to my plate which is new and innovative. Just imagine what our committee can do, take some time and reflect on the bandwidth.
Coming back to your two concern:-
Delegate Abstaining :- I believe that if I am part of a proposed committee, i should abstain . This is a best practice, I also believe by doing this we can avoid conflict and bias. There is no written rule on this so I am not gonna judge anyone not following this, if we see some major conflict because of this, we can discuss that too.
One user being part of more than one committee:- I have said that in the past, we can discuss this and depending on the consensus, the documentation can be amended to reflect the changes. But I am questioning your approach and how you choose to address this point.
I was planning of creating a thread on this forum during reflection session of Season 2 to address this topic but if you feel that this is quite critical and need urgent attention, my suggestion would be to create a thread and discuss it there rather that chasing us on this forum and on discord.
Bring everyone to a thread dedicated to this topic and discuss it there, it will easy for all us to follow this topic, i can also put my view on this topic on one place rather than writing the same thing again and again on different channel.