Draft proposals relating to the election of official Snapshot authors (Proposers).确定与选举正式快照作者(提案人)相关的提案草案

Draft proposals relating to the election of official Snapshot authors (Proposers)

The purpose of this series of drafts is to provide well-discussed content for the next round of proposals. If you have any suggestions for changes, please leave them in the comments and I will amend the drafts in the light of the discussions.

The current Snapshot authors (Proposers) status quo will continue until after the official Snapshot authors (Proposers) election until the current Multisig team completes the change of the new Snapshot author (Proposer) team.

Reference: Powers, obligations of the Snapshot author (Proposer) (published by Andrew):

Proposals:

  1. How many Snapshot authors (Proposers) should we have? (Single choice)

A:7
B:9
C:11
D:13
E:15
F:21

  1. Snapshot author Term. (Regardless of the outcome, the Snapshot author can resign at any time on his or her own initiative and the community can vote to impeach the Snapshot authors by proposal) (Single choice)

A: Three months
B: Six months
C: One year
D: Two years
E: Four years
F: Indefinite

  1. Eligibility to run for Snapshot author: (Approval to vote)(Proposals 3 and 4 may not require a vote and will be decided directly through community discussion if there are no objections)

A: Must be a member who has been actively involved in our DAO activities in the past.
B: No endorsement of option A
C: US citizen/resident or US tax resident are not allowed to stand for election
D: No endorsement of option C
E: Candidates need to have at least 5 million of $justice
F: No endorsement of option G

I think that the options of Proposal 3 in particular still need to be discussed in more depth, hope you can comment actively on it.

Also let me know if you think we need to add more proposals related to the Snapshot authors campaign, thank you.

确定与选举正式快照作者(提案人)相关的提案草案

这一系列草案的目的是为下一轮提案提供经过充分讨论过的内容。如果你有任何修改建议,请在评论中提出,我会根据讨论结果对草案进行修正。

目前的多签现状将会持续到正式多签选举结束后,直到现在的多签团队完成与新多签团队的交接。

参考:快照作者(提案人)的权力,义务(由Andrew发布):

提案内容:

  1. 我们应该有多少快照作者(提案人)?(单选)

A:5

B:7

C:9

D:11

E:13
F:15

  1. 快照作者(提案人)任期。(无论结果如何,快照作者(提案人)都可以随时主动辞职,且社区可以通过提案投票弹劾快照作者(提案人))(单选)

A:3个月
B:半年
C:一年
D:两年
E:四年
F:无限期

  1. 参选快照作者(提案人)的资格:(批准投票)(提案3与4可能并不需要投票表决,如果没有人有异议的话,将直接通过社区讨论决定)

A:必须要是在过去积极的参与DAO活动的成员。
B:不认可A选项
C:美国人不可以参选
D:不认可C选项
E:候选人需要持有超过500万$Justice
F:不认可G选项

我认为尤其是提案3的选项仍然需要更深入的讨论,希望大家能够积极的评论自己的想法,如果你认为我们需要增加更多针对快照作者(提案人)竞选相关的提案,请一并提出, 谢谢。

7 Likes

good job, we need to move forward with these

4 Likes

Unlike multi-signers, proposers do not need to set many cumbersome standards,
I think the DAO can have some default setting on this and if someone has a different voice, he can comment on it. Proposal 3 and 4 are not necessary to vote, I don’t think we need to vote on this.

2 Likes

有道理,我就先把3,4标记为待议选项吧,如果没有人有异议就不上了。
Makes sense, I’ll just mark 3 and 4 as options to be debated and leave them off if no one has a problem with them.

1 Like

Need to be justice token holders. 5 mil might be too high a bar. Maybe 1 million. Also, no need to exclude US residents(multi sigs has to be non US resident)

2 Likes

Our community now has good proposers who can put proposals on the snapshot. I think this issue still needs to discuss extensively because it involves a lot of risks and we need to take it seriously.

2 Likes

3.C. I think this should add some explanation about why

3.C 选项建议增加一下说明

2 Likes

你觉得需要针对哪部分进行说明?是为什么提案3不需要投票表决,还是每个选项存在的原因?

我个人也觉得提案人跟多签相比,作恶的可行性和能造成的破坏较低,所以没必要为了设置门槛而投票,在选择候选人前通过共识张贴相关的要求应该就足够了。

Which part do you think needs to be explained? Is it why Prop 3 doesn’t need to be voted on or is it the reason each option exists?

Personally, I also feel that proposers are less capable of doing evil compared to multiple signatures, so there’s no need to vote just to set a threshold, and posting the relevant requirements via consensus before choosing candidates should be sufficient.

I’ve already given my thought on this topic, I don’t want to say things hurting ppl again, pls copy this link and go to discord to search this link of my message. It’s what they asked for a month.

If you think there’s more that needs to be discussed about this topic, pls comment here, let’s make it better together. As a system, we need to keep moving.

C: US citizen/resident or US tax resident are not allowed to stand for election
I think this is not what DAO governance should consider, it’s the guy that want to be elected should consider whether there is some regulation in his/her country.
But if there is some risk to DAO, it should be listed in governance rules, and go to vote process to make it an official rule.

C:美国人不可以参选
我想这个不是DAO治理需要考虑的情况,这是那个来参选的人,需要自己考虑自己国家的监管。
不过如果这个给DAO带来了风险,而不仅仅是给候选人带来风险,那就应该列入治理的规则里,并通过投票明确下来。

1 Like

I think there was several legal question about being US resident that could be problematic for the DAO.

@Silke explained in one of the community calls but I don’t remember the exact reasons.

Maybe someone can explain again this this? From what I remember was a really important question.

1 Like

Me too, I remember there were several points mentioned as reasons why US residents shouldn’t be multi-sig, but I can only remember few of them, and they shouldn’t be a problem for being proposers.
I think only Silke or Gabriel can answer us with the original idea behind this. Assange family have veto power, so I guess if the proposal from DAO’ discussion is not suitable, they will give us suggestion eventually.

我也是,我记得有几点提到了美国居民不应该进行多重签名的原因,但我只记得其中的几条,而且对于作为提案人来说应该不是问题。
我想只有Silke或Gabriel能回答我们这背后的原始想法。 阿桑奇家族有否决权,所以我想如果DAO的讨论得出的提案不合适,他们最终会给我们建议。

嗯 也是出于这一点,我打算把第三点直接删掉的。后面PMA也提到了相关的内容,唉 这又涉及到各种与安全相关的敏感问题,说实话我觉得作为我们作为外人很难准确的把握和衡量这里的风险,不太容易做决策。

Also for that reason, I was going to just delete the third point. PMA also mentions something relevant later on, This again involves all sorts of sensitive issues related to security, and to be honest I find it difficult to accurately grasp and gauge the risks here as an outsider, and not very easy to make decisions.

我建议你可以合并一些选项,例如持有500万以上JUSTICE加上地区不能是XXX?如果有必要的话

I suggest you can incorporate some options like holding more than 5 million JUSTICE plus the region can’t be XXX? If necessary

She never explained the exact reason.

what she said is that US citizens cannot have access to the multisig. The reason is likely because the DAO is a security, and that US securities laws were not followed, and concerns regarding the funds being seized.

snapshot authors don’t have this problem however, and I would like to be considered as a snapshot author.

2 Likes

Snapshot Authors who can devote time to building AssangeDAO are needed at the moment IMO

1 Like

It’s delayed so long

1 Like