Governance: Mandatory discussion pre voting

Hi all,

Currently there is an active proposal called “Rewards vesting structure changes for all YETI pools” that is being voted on by the community. Upon seeing this proposal it seems clear to me the intention behind this proposal was just to obtain tokens even faster to dilute the market unnecessary (atleast that’s how it appears to me). It is a poorly written proposal with no justification whatsoever.

My issue is mostly not even with all this poor quality. It is mostly that this proposal was not even discussed in this forum to begin. Instead it seems to me that it just seems to have “appeared” as an active proposal. Past proposals have gone through a community discussion before voting started. This has many benefits.

It feels like the creator/funder of this proposal wanted to skip all obstacles and get it passed as quickly as possible for their own benefit.

So basically what I am saying is, if the community feels it is appropriate and worthwhile and you all agree, is it possible to make it so that you can only submit a proposal for voting that has been on the forum for minimum of e.g 2 days?

As we have seen in the past, discussion gives fhe community a better sense of how a proposal affects the project. Especially new members who find community discussions helpful to understand the implications of a proposal. So making it mandatory seems beneficial.

Keen to hear your thoughts.

Should the pre voting discussion of every future proposal be mandatory? Is it possible?


thanks for raising this question!

I fully agree, not only the proposals need to have a fix time (3-5 days) for the community discussion on the forum (here), but also the proposals format should be fixed.

Though on this forum most of the proposals are somewhat well-structured, I believe we need to have even more strict rules. For example, if someone proposes to add an index, there should be analysis of the components, market size, risks etc. and obviously an actual proposal on the initial index composition

Otherwise the topic should be placed in the Research section

Regarding that proposal to change vesting for YETI, while I hate it format, I don’t mind as the vesting will be just inline with the one for PI


Totally agree with it. And we can see it from voting engagement is very low. So the discussion is necessary to activate people before the actual voting.


I agree, but I don’t think there’s any way to enforce this on chain. You would have to create some kind of oracle to do so.

I’d rather see a small period of time before voting goes live where people can see the proposal, but I believe that’s already in. Don’t we have a queue where proposals need to sit for a day before being voted on?


Yea it seems challenging. Just a totally random idea i thought of is perhaps having some kind of nft that gets issued to the creator of the proposal, after a few days of being in the discussion forum. And this nft shows that the proposal has been submitted to the forum and having this nft (while also having 10k cvp) could be two prerequisites to go live. I don’t know if that even makes sense.

I don’t know if currently if there is a period of time, since I never saw this proposal brought up in this forum before. I could be wrong.

Yea in future it could mean people just having enough cvp to fund a proposal and not caring about community feedback :frowning:

I agree! Glad to see many don’t like the way that it was setup.

1 Like