I made a proposal last time about having grape monthly award go down to each subDAO or DAO voting it out by themselves as they alone see who’s performing well. Also the ongoing vote was opened up for verified wallet which is wrong, anyone who’s not holding grape shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
This ongoing vote doesn’t determine who’s the best in each subdao and I wish to offer my two grapes on this. I’m displeased by the results.
I agree 100% – we should start the vote over
It could be between the whole community as it enhances community participation but I don’t think it’s nice for verified wallets to be allowed access to voting because the system easily could be gamed as this fellows don’t know a thing or two happening in the server and why the people they’re voting for deserves the award
I have to disagree with @Tariqstp1, cause there is no reason to restart a vote when from the start Verified Wallets couldn’t vote anyway.
I will simply put below the logs of channel creation and channel permission updates.
The channel as is demonstrated in the picture was created 3rd of November of 2021 and the moment it was created the permissions for it were changed to only Grape members. Below is the current channel permissions and this were the permissions set that day.
This is my take in this discussion. So yes, in conclusion i disagree with restarting the vote.
Thank you tariq. I will gladly accept your two grapes.
In my opinion, this initiative was created in order to add an additional layer of community involvement in emission distribution. Grape Awards is a way to celebrate the most hard working and value providing community members so it only makes sense to me that this is one of the things that is not DAO or SubDAO exclusive.
Thanks for sharing this. Based on this information I support keeping the vote as is
I agree that only Grape Members (Holders) should be permitted to vote on any decisions, in general.
The idea of SubDAOs voting on the performance of its own members might be unnecessary if the rewards model incorporates performance objectively.
Voting should only be seen as a potential for excess emissions beyond any inherent caps, whether dynamic or static.
Interesting topic for discussion and review!
yes exactly. I mean this was the reason of the awards from the beginning right? to allow exceptional members in their respective field to get a “community bonus” on top of their emissions. The size of the award per candidate should be weighted by the % of community votes acquired imo.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
