Indeed we could see this as a service to the DAO Community so that less-knowledgable and less experienced community members can contribute to the DAO where as moderators review and deliver input before proposals move to snapshot. To me it makes sense that PVL team members are also becoming moderator reviewers since without PVL’s feedback drafting up proposals will be hard as we have seen in the past.
I will think about this and expand the flow diagram tomorrow.
Where exactly have you seen this in the past? - From my experience there are certain things which we cannot do without PVL - like update the docs.pantherprotocol.io site with the PIP for snapshots…
I do agree however on the point that we cannot make a PIP from the community side that PVL fundamentally cannot execute. Where do we ‘insert’ that legal/compliance check? - Supposedly right at the end?
Can you merge yours with this one? it has a good flow - yours at the top side and the rest already includes the councel reviews which would include PVL members to ensure it is good to go for a formal PIP?
Thanks, I think the mods should have a more passive position.
Just making sure that anything getting submitted to the council is not going to waste their time. (as they would assemble as a group to evaluate)
The mods can assist in the discussion to help get the community there. They will have the experience to do so. So less knowledgeable members can contribute with a helping hand from the mods.
The mods shouldn’t need members from the PVL. Mods are more of a gatekeeper.
The council should be a combination of PVL, Panther foundation, and the community. Who will discuss the proposal, see if any changes need to occur. If any, they will inform the mods who will echo the request to the community.
If the council is in alignment with the proposal, then it can move into the more formal stages where the snapshot authors would create such. They will also produce a new thread detailing the snapshot
Community > Mods check > Council Review > Authors create
This is good idea, should be mix of community and PVL. Panther community alone can’t review proposals as it lacks tech details and experience. PVL members should not be rewarded for review of course.
Back to something else how do we ensure that people here making comments are even members of the DAO ( aka ZKP holders ) ? - This is where the staking NFT is interesting - I know we all have one but I dont even know how to see it - perhaps Subverted Norms could make an even more interesting NFT for us for this purpose - any ideas?
Thanks, I really like what you are doing here and I am looking forward to the expansion of your flow diagram.
Eventually the flow diagram can be put up to vote once you @Hodlerboi have drafted up the entire Governance flow diagram as @ToXiC_eHC suggested. Once the flow diagram is implemented we could see a more transparent Goverance flow.
We have assesed initiatives like this when we set up the Panther forum last year. Initiatives like POAP and TCP for example. We came to the conclusion that these were not feasible due to technical (integration) reasons on Discourse. Furthermore, we want to facilitate a certain level of privacy on the Panther forum.
Governance discussion take time. Best would imho be to draft up after few weeks of discussion. Discussing step for step makes sense.
My concern is how do we provide anonymity while ensuring that the general public is not pushing discussions and initiatives?
That’s indeed a valid point. A few things on that regard:
- We are promoting the forum more actively through social media right now as you probably have seen. Everyone’s free to participate and I encourage them to do so.
- We have an internal Governance Framework & I am here to suggest things based on our point of view. The community can vote in the Panther framework and we can support them in order to make sure that it’s waterproof. The framework should be seen as a way to document the existing, implicit, Governance process.
I agree. The community is relatively small but sufficient to set up proposals. I am a private sale investor and I do not really want to be doxed for security reasons.
Eventually the proposal will be put up to vote and is needed for exchange listings and ecosystem updates.
Thanks but that was not my question? - I was asking about anonymity and public participation in discussions and pushing of topics… The exchange discussion and ecosystem updates is something else.
@Joris - I guess what you are saying is - anyone can discuss and push topics etc - but at the end of the day it is the ZKP holders who has to cast their votes to approve and proposals?
Yes indeed & hence why a moderator review process is so important as well as Panther’s DAO rules and values. The community could for example set out a few DAO rules here in order to protect the protocol from harmful proposals.
Would it be possible to arrange a discord voice channel to discuss ideas?
We can make notes of what was discussed and add it to the thread.
I think this would benefit the pace and flow of ideas.
In future Mods could arrange this with the community.
Starting to make sense yes
Yes next step is snap shot? Most discussion for this proposal will be discourse i think
I think we should hear and give privileges to those people who participated in the first DAO, attracting the zkp prize as a passport to confirm their credentials, but for those who want to participate in this, we should not abandon these people or compare them with those who come now