The current threshold for introducing non-technical ZenIPs is 100,000 Zen. I feel that this is too high and inhibits greater community participation, even considering delegation. I understand that there is a desire to prevent “spam” proposals, but think that can still be achieved with a lower threshold, and the existing quorum and majority requirements (which I don’t think should change).
As such, I’d like to introduce a ZenIP to lower the submission threshold significantly.
I’d be interested to hear people’s thoughts on what a more reasonable submission threshold would be.
I think it’s important indeed to lower the threshold to submit a vote. It can be hard for some community members to have delegated ZEN, even with good proposals
I think the minimum requirement should at least be halved or even reduced by 10.
Then we will be able to see more community proposals.
We can even have spam prevention available. If we do get more than X proposals per month, non-validated by the DAO council, then we raise the threshold again without going through a ZenIP.
I’d love to have your thoughts on that @rocket , and everyone, ofc
I wholeheartedly agree with lowering the threshold. I believe this would increase community engagement. In particular, I support reducing the minimum requirement to 15,000 ZEN for non-technical proposals. This adjustment would foster a more inclusive environment and encourage a broader range of community members to contribute their ideas. For technical proposals, keeping the current threshold seems reasonable for now.
I think this discussion is very good and I agree with reducing the horizen required for the proposal.
Because a proposal should have a deep interest in Zen.
I strongly agree with @rocket 15,000ZEN, because it has spam protection. Thank you @Manon
Hi everyone. When will a token from the DAO discourse be proposed to ZENIP?
Is there a standard for when discourse is sufficient? Is it determined by the proponent?
Do you mean if we propose a new token on Discourse, when will we propose the ZenIP to vote?
Everything we propose on Discourse will have to go through an official ZenIP and be voted on Snapshot or another platform by the community. If the vote meets the minimum threshold, the ZenIp will be applied in the best future.
I agree with lowering the threshold, and also would like to suggest that successful proposals be rewarded with some Zen, as they added to the value of the coin.
Not sure about the reward.
We need also a sustainable process. If we give rewards we have to raise revenues first
Genuine participation in the DAO is more suitable for a sustainable future and to have people interested. But if a person pushes a ZenIP and wants to do the job, they have to ask for a grant when they propose.
There are no determined criteria. We don’t have any deadlines neither. We don’t need to.
It’s up to the ZenIP writer (and the one who will post it) to determine if there was enough discussion about it. Does he have the required amount? Does he need users to delegate funds? Did he find the community members to delegate funds? If yes, he should go! Free DAO
We should move forward on this. I recommend 10 days between the moment we announce that a vote will take place and the actual voting period. So we have time to re-deliver the tutorials and warn the community about the wallet snapshot and the need to link the mainchain addresses, ect, to vote.
@rocket was working on a new tutorial (more complete from beginning to end). Where are we on this? So we can propose this ZenIP
Circling back on this, I’m going to amend this to including lowering the threshold for technical ZenIPs too. The technical threshold should still be higher than the non-technical one, but it seems that both are prohibitively high today.
Technical Proposals:
–Change submission requirement from 200K $Zen to $100K $Zen
–Change quorum requirement from 10% to 5%
Non-Technical Proposals:
–Change submission requirement from 100K $Zen to 25K $Zen
–Change quorum requirement from 5% to 3%
I think this would bring Horizen more in line with other DAOs and enable more people to participate in submitting proposals while making it easier to achieve quorum, which has been an issue in the past.
While the argument for reducing the submission requirement is valid, I don’t believe it necessitates a decrease in the threshold. The primary objective should be to establish a process where individuals wishing to propose technical or non-technical ideas first discuss these with the team and the community. This could be achieved by initiating a thread in a Discord channel or on Discourse to validate the proposal with the team and community. If there’s potential interest in the proposal, it can then proceed to the voting stage. I understand that this may seem somewhat centralized, given the significant amount of ZEN required. However, if our goal is to build a sustainable, community-driven DAO, the handholding and validation of proposals are crucial.
A case in point for the opposite approach is the Harmony DAO. It was not heavily regulated, leading to individuals creating random spam accounts on Discourse, voting for their nonsensical proposals, and withdrawing money from the Harmony Foundation.
@martindoc I think it’s important.
We have anyway the DAO committee, we can also implement a scheduling program.
The blockchain is still growing, the DAO is new and the community shifted the last years. We still can make the threshold higher in the future
That makes sense, but my concern is that this would still make it difficult for the typical Zen holder to submit a proposal for voting. From what I can tell, there are very few wallets with enough Zen to delegate that much voting power, which would create a more centralized dynamic. Maybe 25K Zen is too low for the non-technical threshold… I’m just trying to strike a balance between greater access for the community and preventing a “free-for-all” dynamic where the barrier to entry is too low.
