Any community members are allowed to make drafts of proposals, publish them on FORUM and participate in discussions. (Temperature check: there should be a threshold, such as 30 likes for any drafts of proposals to be able to be submitted to the representatives for the purpose of examination or editing) (*There should be an invention of a mechanism on FORUM which functions to verify wallets which bind holders of $Justice to prevent from operation of bots.)
After the drafts of proposals pass the temperature check and are submitted to the representatives, the representatives and authors of the drafts of proposals could work hand in hand to complement the drafts of proposals before the representatives post on Discord.
When a particular draft of proposal is examined and edited by representatives, there are 2 places on Discord on where the particular draft of proposal is to be posted simultaneously:
a) MAIN channel of “proposals” where only the title of the draft of proposal is posted for the purpose of announcement, AND
b) SUB-channel of “proposals” where the particular SUB-channel is to be named after the title of the draft of proposal. Within the particular SUB-channel of “proposals” on Discord where the details of the particular draft of proposal are posted and discussed, only the representatives and the author(s) are allowed to make comments or discuss the said draft of proposal whereas other community members are merely allowed to read the record of conversation. At this stage, if any other community members wish to join the discussion or to provide suggestions within the SUB-channel, they could do so only through the approval of the representatives OR author(s) of the draft of proposal.
After any draft of proposal is posted on the MAIN channel as well as SUB-channel of “proposals” on Discord for 48 hours, if, within this period of 48 hours,
a) the draft of proposal could receive approval from 1 proposer and 2 seconders who both of them must come from the representative team, AND
b) there is no objection from Assange’s family on the ground of harm against the reputation or benefit of Julian Assange,
the draft of proposal would then be turned into an “official proposal”, followed by a cooldown period lasting for 24 hours.
It is the duty of representatives to submit the official proposals to snapshot. For non-representatives, instead of submitting the proposal to snapshot, they could only cast votes.
The updated parameters regarding how every snapshot is approved are as follows:
The cooldown period: 24 hours
*The length of election: 72 hours (If there is any emergency proposal, the length could be shortened to below 72 hours but above 24 hours.)
Quorum (suitable for two choices & multiple choices, but not for single choice): 20% of $JUSTICE in circulation (top 100 CEX holdings are not considered)
*Electoral system (suitable for two choices & multiple choices, but not for single choice): First past the post (“FPTP”). Voters could only vote for one option where the “winner” or elected choice is the one getting the highest votes.
*Single choice: When there is only one option, the quorum should be set to 50% of $JUSTICE in circulation (top 100 CEX holdings are not considered)
temperature check need to be more efficient because simple likes can be easily manipulated by bots
24 hours temperature check Discord is to short time in my opinion, considering different times zones and not everyone have immediate availability to review, also Assange family needs time to review them, I would say minimum 48h-72h
My suggestion would be to use the forum here to discuss and finalise proposals, not discord. A temperature check could be done by way of poll in the forum here itself, with a majority needed to allow a proposal to be added to snapshot.
Accordingly, I would suggest the following:
For any action to be implemented by the AssangeDAO, a AIP must be prepared and must pass through the following process, as amended from time to time and publicized on the AssangeDAO Forum:
Draft Proposal:
Creation of a draft proposal using the AIP Template and its discussion in the AssangeDAO Forum, with the discussion open for a minimum of 7 days. Where a proposal requires any additional on-chain interaction by AssangeDAO, the required code must be provided prior to the draft proposal moving into Active Proposal stage.
A simple poll is conducted on the forum to take a temperature check as to whether the Proposal is likely going to pass.
Where a proposal is vetoed by the Assange family unit, it will not be processed. [This aspect was already decided by a previous AIP.]
Active Proposal: Where a proposal meets the requirements of the Draft Proposal stage, a Moderator (known as “Author” on Snapshot - to be separately voted on) will assign an AIP number and move the proposal into active voting on Snapshot.
Based on the proposed framework, from the beginning of the draft to the submission of final proposal to snapshot , no one can actually stop the troublemakers from proposing if the draft could pass through the temperature check and the idea coming across our mind is that manipulation could easily take place. Hence, we propose to set up this mechanism (1 proposer 2 seconders, seconders and proposer should not overlap) to prevent or at least alleviate the potential problem. Then, regarding the “gatekeeper” mechanism, seemingly it is anti-democratic and may affect the progress of the work, if a proposal could pass the temperature check but cannot proceed to the snapshot.
I come up with a better idea where the gatekeeper mechanism is removed and is replaced by following method:
When a proposer(representative) didn’t follow the code of conduct and submit a proposal without permission, the proposer will be removed from the representative (proposer) team, and the proposal will become invalid.
China uses WeChat, very few people use dis, and volunteers in the United States or other countries may use forums or dc, so how should we synthesize the poll results of members in China, the United States or other regions on their respective social media? (How to judge the authenticity of the respective social platform polls?) My suggestion is that all polls are carried out on the forum. I believe the forum can also verify positions. The atmosphere in dc is very bad.
May I ask how “Ideas” fit in. Currently there are numerous Ideas being generated under the Ideas category - but how does a proposal arise from any of these? Who makes a decision about how they are ranked, worthy to go towards a proposal etc?
Agree with your view Silke - that is the best way moving forward and we’re not inventing the wheel either here - this is how it works elsewhere. The safety mechanism is any proposal does no harm to Julian Assange. That’s all clear, that the family/legal rep gives it the thumbs up before it goes to a community vote.
yes something like this needs to be implemented by the core, explained and conceptualised quickly before people lose heart and stop airing their ideas.