Well said. A lot of good points. It may be beneficial for the DAO to provide all projects with a template executive summary to follow. A 2-3 page summary that touches on all key points. If all projects produce this doc in the same format it would be easy to compare and light reading.
However, all this talk about voter input and engagement may be irrelevant. I have said it before, we need to know how much control top whales have in the voting process. If for example, MEOW controlled 51% of the vote, then what everyone thinks is irrelevant and is just smoke and mirrors to get community engagement and free ideas. Not saying that is the case, just trying to give an example, but the point is if 2 or 3 whales control the lionâs share, then they will always get what they want and it doesnât matter what the rest of us think.
If youâre in the discord, check this brief convo out. Last voting round, top 25 wallets had ~8% share of influence and voted somewhat along the lines of the total population.
Anon voting should solve current issue with herding, not sure making voting on proposals harder is the play as we would create more resistance and less community engagement. I have a few wallets to go through and cannot be bothered to fill a survey for each one for every vote for every proposal.
There havenât been any damaging proposals yet and people are not being paid much at $5k per month for this to matter, hence a good solution if a predatory proposal somehow passes anon voting.
Great idea! The verification questionnaire to ensure voter understanding before casting a vote is a smart addition. And the data collected with this is also gold!
These are some idea worth testing. No timer, but a quick login check sounds good. At best it introduces a fairer system. At worse itâs just one of many DAO entries tested.
Me and Sax met in OkayBears and have also done Twitter Spaces together from time to time, we came up with the idea when we made some observations regarding the votes and how they were conducted.
This is an amazing proposal. Adding this part to solve the language barrier problem is where the proposal becomes crucially important - There must be someone who is at least bilingual in each language channel that can translate from English to that channelâs native language. We have the ability to do that. We can share information already. We could improve it even, or potentially use a bot in the foreign language channels.
The Technical language barrier (or technical knowledge) is another important issue that many people struggle with. This will help countless voters.
Also, including any help with disabilities should be mandatory in all votes everywhere, even decentralized and permissionless votes should have true equality in my opinion. Otherwise it just wouldnât be fair.
Language is important, and so are disabilities. We often take our ease of use for granted when it comes to accessing the internet, but it is actually significantly harder for some than it is for others.
As long as I can remember, WCAG and now WCAG 2.0 has been the de-facto standard for universal accessibility, and after a quick accessibility browse on vote.jup.ag I can see that there are currently significant flaws in terms of accessibilty. This includes anchor points, tab indexes and aria labels, aria tags etc to allow a keyboard user, vision impaired or other disabilities from browsing vote.jup.ag. These are things we generally do not think about (I do, but I work as a full stack developer on a monolithic application that implements full accessibility), and they are easy to take for granted. True equality in the voting process should include WCAG 2.0 compliance.
These developments in Jupiter are truly exciting, and there is a lot to explore. In terms of specific projects in Jupiter in the near future, there are several noteworthy initiatives underway, including enhancements to the user interface, improved performance and scalability, and expanded functionality for certain features. Additionally, the voting process for these projects is a crucial aspect of the development process, allowing the community to have a say in the direction of the platform. I am sure
happy to see that the implementation of voting is well underway, and we are on track to see the selected projects working on Jupiter.
I think that since the proposal has changed drastically since it was created that everyone should take a look at it with fresh eyes There is some real good stuff in there!
There is some real good stuff in there!