Joxes
October 26, 2023, 12:48am
38
Hello community!
The road to Season 5 becomes exciting, and we want to post our rationales after the 16th voting cycle.
16th Governance Call
On Oct 23th we had our Governance Call to discuss the upcoming changes proposed for Season 5.
Participants : ~44 attendees (40 collected).
Duration : 1hr 59 min.
Results and rationale
We have put our rationale into the threads referring to the changes proposed for Season 5; check below
We vote FOR the introduction of the Anticapture Commission, but we wish to share some critical insights alongside the arguments presented by other delegates.
Part of this stems from the history of progression of the distribution of voting power among delegates since inception and the allocation of OP tokens across so many different purposes, which has not had the same impact on their use as a governance token. Although the distribution of OP tokens was implicity recognized since the allocation …
Security Council: Vote #1
Thank you so much @bobby for the explanation. Nothing more to add, now is more clear for us.
We vote FOR this proposal.
The eventual introduction of the Security Council is an obvious step in the right direction and we are happy that it’s happening now. The details provided in the documentation and clarifications in this thread lead us to believe that Security Council Charter cover all the necessary points to achieve its effectiveness and reduce the previous risks as well as the new ones with …
Code of Conduct Coucil Budget
We vote FOR the introduction of CoC Council.
We had different arguments and points of view about the pros and cons of introducing this Council. In short, as a trusted, neutral group to handle and make decisions on sensitive complaints such as doxxing, the CoC Council is better than getting delegates to form an opinion on the case. We consider that this is progress. On the other hand, a current concern is what happens when the conflict escalates, and members feel irrational pressure prior to the…
Grants Council Operating Budget
We vote FOR the Grants Council Operating Budget.
Not much to say here, we have followed the work done by the Grants Council from the outside and we know the workload that it really entailed last season, so the addition of new reviewers is reasonable. The same with the new challenges encountered, such as the tracking of appropriate proposals, so the new role conceived for milestones and metrics is also a natural step.
Developer Advisory Board Budget and Ratify Developer Advisory Board Members
We vote FOR both the board budget and ratifity its proposed members.
We are happy to see the Foundation take more initiatives like these that promote diversity and encourage the collective to progressively begin to take ownership and self-regulation in the technical part of the protocol and contributions in that aspect; very in line also with the now presence of 3 core teams for the Collective . The budget proposed as baseline is reasonable, considering the possibility of being rewarded retroact…
Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar
About this one, our second point expressed in a previous case about how to improve these processes becomes more relevant. In line with the comments of the other delegates, the upcoming installation of the CoC Council and some quotes referring to publications originating from this account; with all this in mind, it is appropriate for us to decide to abstain.
Proposal Title: Code of Conduct Violation: Carlos Melgar
Proposal Type: Code of Conduct Violation
Executive Summary
A community member has filed a report, substantiated by documentation, against grant recipient Carlos Melgar.
Discord name: carlosjmelgar
Reported violation: Intentional doxxing
Enforcement type: Suspension
As outlined in the Code of Conduct , the Token House must vote to suspend grant recipients that are reported to have committed severe violations, which include intentional do…
See you at the next voting cycle!
6 Likes