Establishing a rule for vote registration/listing

As some of us experienced, there were some votes that went quite fast even before matured conclusion with deep discussion was made. So I would like to propose a simple procedure before anyone should go through before put the opinion on vote:

  1. Two weeks for discussion if it is not very urgent thing before put it to a vote
  2. It is desirable to discuss and get to some point of agreement, but if there is a clear point which needs to be decided by a vote, then it is okay to put a vote.
  3. If there is any necessity for discussion with dev teams, there should be a (sort of) AMA session in live.
  4. We need to define which channel will be used for which purpose. In my opinion,
  • TG: urgent support, general discussion (I have watched from other protocols that Discord was usually used for chitchat and for other reasons (team building or build team spirit, etc.).)
  • Forum: For the item which needs deeper discussion
    This is just an example, and we can define our own. But I believe that defining each role of channel is very effective to manage the governance.

Please put your opinion on this, and let’s make some explicit rules on the vote inside the community.


I like the 2 week rule of thumb.

Also, I wish there was a way to indicate on a proposal whether or not it is “team endorsed”? It is fabulous to have a vibrant community to help define and set project priorities!

The caliber of the ideas we are coming up with through open brainstorming, piggybacking on one another’s ideas, and bringing diverse perspectives to bear on the problems is fabulous!

At the same time, there is a risk of the community passing a log jam of proposals faster than the team can digest and implement them.

I would be more likely to support “team endorsed” proposals, if there was a way to denote that on the proposal.

Maybe the live AMA will be sufficient to gather team sentiment towards a proposal? Yes, I think that works pretty good, actually, as I think about it here.

Definitely the AMA approach to gathering team member input seems to fit well with the decentralized ethos, it can strike a nice balance of community leading w/ proposals and team reacting.

If an AMA is held, we would all see the team’s posture towards the proposal.


I don’t know if the cost of creating a poll is refunded at the end.
In case I think that a simple poll to approve this set of rules would be perfect (let’s discuss 2 weeks before :smiley: ).
So whoever posts too fast a text proposal not discussed, passing the vote, will obtain only further discussion. We can go even further and define some pillar points which are a kind of Constitution and can be changed only with 70% majority for example.

1 Like

I agree that enough time should be set aside to discuss things before voting.

If we allow “urgent” topic to go to vote sooner, we also have to define what urgent means.


Agree. Supportive of having a general delay between posting in the forum and then votes.

But like you, I think it’s important to not impose this for everything, as there might be things that need to go to vote ASAP.

1 Like