Sort out details of the updated proposal for GEPs and post – plus importance of GEPs #239
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Situation
We want to update the way we vote on the grid. We want 80% consensus, but we need to define this with the TF team: how do we proceed exactly?
Todo
Things to Look out
Option
Be sure to include
The importance of participation: #240
This is to be discussed amongst the development stakeholders next week. @mik-tf @scott please update here when there is news and we can communicate it. I would suggest to combine this with #240.
Via Karoline:
"Kristof, Sabrina and Thabet talked and Thabet will share suggestions from Kristof in the development group. After that it can be decided how/when to do the call instead (tmr with main dev. stakeholder call) or seperate on Thursday) Thanks"
@mik-tf @scott Can you please share the agreed-upon details so we can write the post and share with stakeholders?
"Instead of focussing on weighted votes of farmers, we'll open the votes for everyone who has TFT on TFChain. The more TFT you have on there, the more weight your vote has. This is how most blockchains already use DAOs.
Will write here if there is more info.
Re: timing, we will always try to give a maximum amount of time (e.g. 10 days to two weeks) but of course there may be exceptions. (?)
Sort out details of the updated proposal for GEPsto Sort out details of the updated proposal for GEPs and post – plus importance of GEPsScott and Mik will bring it up in their meeting on Wednesday:
Put it out as a request for comment, get some feedback on voting period.
Meanwhile check in on development time of getting the new system in place and agree on some high-level timing.
What about the problem with keeping TFT on chain.
ThreeFold GEP on GEP Voting Process
@gosam the comment above is OK.
Let's coordinate with Sabrina on the GEP. cc: @Amanda
I remembered we wanted to check if we should implement a minimum period that TFT must be in the account to be eligible to vote.
Not saying we should do it, but we should discuss if we should do it!
@scott
@sabrinasadik
We could discuss this on the next meeting.
Drafts are here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ovi2ecDI2G75CecLr2tKs7W5a69Ntxo-9F-qaVW7kFI/edit#heading=h.kyru52g80m08
Some comments from Sabrina and Lee need to be checked by @mik-tf and @scott
And then @Amanda we need to agree on how to post. I feel like they can be in the same news update, but two separate posts on the forum.
@mik-tf I believe we agreed to leave out the above comment for now, correct?
This requires a discussion amongst the group, should happen today.
Almost done. We just need to define cool down periods if a gep doesnt pass. Will have updates next Monday
OK then will move this to the next sprint. Thanks @mik-tf
GEP has been shared.
Let's think about how and when to share the importance of GEP post @Amanda
I'd say as soon as possible. @gosam
Yes @Amanda let's share this today and point people towards the fact that a GEP is now open
We'll hold on the "importance of GEP" post for now and save it for a more relevant moment.