timdaub (π₯,π©)
@timdaub.eth
but would this all have happened if the DAO had required a 2/3 majority for dispersing > 10% of funds?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
tldr (tim reilly)
@tldr
Interesting idea
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
timdaub (π₯,π©)
@timdaub.eth
What I find noteworthy is that the proposal created a near perfect controversy. Didnβt it create a near 50:50 situation? This is why there are camps now, or not? If it was a 2/3 quorum, the majority would dominate the minority and that would surface less as conflict on social media?
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
ccarella πͺ
@ccarella.eth
I have DMd every single voter this morning. People arenβt feeling they are in camps and the external drama has almost no effect on how people are feeling. Most people are energized by the engagement and the process. People told me why they didnβt like the prop but only one person told me they gad a meta issue.
1 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
timdaub (π₯,π©)
@timdaub.eth
I observed at least two or three camps here on FC: - Those that supported the proposal - Those that want to send more money elsewhere (e.g. to devs) (hard no) - Those that had concerns with the proposal (they wanted adjustments, soft no)
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
ccarella πͺ
@ccarella.eth
Oh there were shared opinion groups for the prop for sure, as always.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
timdaub (π₯,π©)
@timdaub.eth
Is your point that prop 28 is like any other Purple prop?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ccarella πͺ
@ccarella.eth
No just that all votes that donβt have full consensus have camps. It would be wild if you have 50 no votes and 50 different reasons.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction