As we all know, the @proofofbrainio account is not a very active account in the community, he must have his reasons, but I think someone with a responsibility his size (taking care of a community) should be more active.
As we do not know the day he will appear again, let us build the path to be followed. In order for the community to have a minimum of stability about its future, I propose the governance system that I will describe below.
This article will be edited every time any rule changes, the changed rule will have linked the post to which it has changed so that it is a timeless post and can be accessed at any time by any user who wants to be aware of how governance will work.
Governance Members
According to the latest publication of @interpretation, we have 3,707 investors in the POB.
Art. 1: 5 (five) people formed the council, to start designing decisions on the direction the community will take.
Art. 2: The 5 members will not impose any rules, they will be a kind of council that will discuss issues of concern of the community, look for a solution and then present the community as an official statement from the community.
Art. 3: For greater ease of dialogue with small members without representation, each member must be from a different country.
Art. 3: Every user can compete to be a member of the council.
Art. 4: Profiles that do not wish to identify their country, but would like to compete, will be represented by a non-country, and will also be entitled to a place among the 5.
Art. 5: If there is more than 1 member from a certain country competing, there will be a prior vote among the members of that country, where they will vote for which one will represent them.
Art. 6: If there are not enough countries to fill the 5 places, the remaining places will be used by the remaining users.
Let's go to an example for better visualization: Brazil, Nigeria and Canada decide to compete for one of the 5 vacancies. No other country or non-country decides to run for the remaining two.
The primary representatives of the 3 countries that presented themselves will get the initial vacancies. And the two that are left will be available to be played by any user able to compete.
Aptitude to compete
Authors and Curators will be on an equal footing to compete.
Art. 4: The minimum staked requirement to compete for a vacancy will be 100 PobPower. (merely illustrative value, yet to be defined)
A symbolic value, since any author who decides to run seriously will likely make a post bringing his views on various issues to the community and his supporters will vote up his post so that he gets the 100 POB.
Art. 8: Any curator can compete as long as they also meet the minimum requirement of 100 PobPower.
Who can be a curator? Anyone who owns PobPower and votes for someone else, not just themselves.
Art. 9: To compete, the user will have to receive 50% +1 valid votes from the members of his country.
Art. 10: When a member of the country does not vote for anyone, the vote will not be valid.
Art. 5: In case of a tie, the other members elected for governance will vote to choose which one they want to be part of them.
Governance Period
Art. 6: The period that the user will enjoy the governance will be 2 months.
Art. 13 : After the period, you can apply for the post again if no member of your country or non-country is able to apply, or if there are no other candidates.
Art. 7: After the period, the user can try a role again if there is a majority of the community.
PobFund
Art. 8: The PobFund balance can be used to bring improvements to the community.
Art. 9: The user who brings improvements to the visual interface of the community, as for the code, can be paid with POB from PobFund.
Art. 16: As it deals with the economy of the community, this POB can only be used if the 5 members voted positively for the proposal.
Art. 10: For the transaction to be made, the multi-signature system will be used
Art. 11: A publication will be made to bring transparency to the community, about which project will be financed and which the user will receive and how much he will receive.
Changes
Art. 12: Any article can be changed if the community wishes.
Art. 13: This publication will keep revoked articles and edit new articles, and another publication will keep only the current articles for better viewing.
Remembering that this is a draft, which will be changed according to the comments in the post until we have a group of users forming the de facto governance, and then with articles being changed and added by them
How to help improve this post
- Comment
Your opinion is important so that we can find the right way to expose ideas through these rules, or others that are presented in the comments
- Promote
Click on promote for the publication to reach more users
- Interact with comment ideas
If you find any ideas in the comments good, reply that you agree with them, or give them a vote so that they remain among the first to be read
Great effort @vempromundo,
But I prefer @amr008's ideas on the matter. I especially don't like the idea of representatives from different countries. I'd like to read your comment on @amr008's post, to hear what you think.
I solemnly agree with all of these.
The growth of every successful community can always be traced to some brainers.
But what happens if applicants emerge from more than 5 different countries, all with good intents to foster the growth of the community ?
I agree- if there are more than 5 applicants from 5 countries it could cause tension between national groups which we dont want. Perhaps it should be 7- an applicant from each of the 6 populated continents and a single non located applicant. In the event a continent doesnt provide an applicant that would be available for a non located applicant
I solemnly believe that there is enough room for adjustment of governance policy as stated above.
Man, you and trost really need to sit for a talk. Well, digitally anyway.
I'll try to catch him in discord sometime!
The idea is that more than 5 countries compete. The internal vote of the countries is to define who will be the representative.
After the general vote, I hope that more than 5 countries compete, and they can all be voted on.
I can feel that none represents my country and I would like to vote for another that represents another country. That will be allowed.
Okay...
This clarifies
"Art. 2: The 5 members will not impose any rules, they will be a kind of council that will discuss issues of concern of the community, look for a solution and then present the community as an official statement from the community."
I believe this section needs to be fleshed out further. Will the 5 have the ability to implement rules if the community agrees with the rule or change? How will the 5 know the majority of the community agrees with the solution they have come up with? will there be votes? How will the 5 deal with dissent among themselves in the event of a 3-2 split for changes to governance or over a solution to a community issue.
There are other pieces to discuss here as well...
We are talking about the creation of a powerful council that will help to guide the direction of POB. There needs to be very clear language about what can and cannot be done with that power and how they will ensure they actually have the communities consent and agreement on issues and changes.
The idea would be the consensus, thinking about solutions until they reach one that the five agree on
ok so it would be full consensus or nothing. and how would those decisions be ratified by the community once theyve been settled on by the 5?
Yeah the consensus is critical. Especially if it could involve decision making on certain matters. It's more like a fail safe.
At the moment I'm seeing a lot of quick changes of mind around here.
And all this together with the low value that cryptos in general are and should fall further.
With that HIVE drops and the token values too.
The crash just coincided with the turbulent times around here.
So I really want to see @proofofbrainio next steps regardless of whether he is very active or not.
Your idea is cool, but I think it requires a lot of other details that even I can't think of right now. And I also hope that all of this isn't thinking solely about the value of the token. Because this will depend on several variables like the current market price. But building a solid community is interesting. But, I still want to wait for @proofofbrainio's new placements after its update.
Agreed! It's really necessary, I'm in.
I feel you, hermano, this is good stuff.
I would give more if I could. Thanks for helping out.
It's a reasonable number if people are dedicated to the task. I would imagine these people would be able to commit time online to evaluate and address concerns. I'll admit I don't know how much time that would be as this isn't an outside job. Your approach works with @trostparadox's recommendations.
I think we'd have enough for one council. I'm not sure if it's possible for a rotation each time to have five new people from different countries. I kind of feel 2-6 are the same concept, but not identical. You have the primary rule which says we need 5 people each from a different country and then a list of exceptions to that rule.
Similar concepts. They could be the same step with #8 as an exception.
No major issues. We'd hammer out any details and move on. I feel it works with the article trost posted today. Kind of goes hand-in-hand. I feel that we'd have to have some hard requirements in the beginning though. I don't know that we should change things so quickly unless there's a strong belief that something is wrong.
Yes, some articles are kind of redundant that need to be headed by an article with only items
For example
art. 7 User needs at least 100 PobPower
I - if the user is a curator, he must have curate at least x user within x days
something like that
Yeah, I think so. Don't get me wrong, though. I feel that all your points are valid.
Nice ideias, I think that the period could be longer, but with a time within new periods. If a person is choosed, they stay in the post for let's say, 4 months, but they only can enter again after 4 months they go out.
I have always been a fan of the creative minority.
To be fair, I think the POB 5 is a great proposal. And the different country idea was a great idea. I just think they should also come from different continents or regions if possible.
100 POB? $30-90 ? Looks like a joke.
Why even to have these Art7 Art8 there ? Nothing but waste of space and time.
Make it more significant ( if you really think it is needed) , or ... remove these limitations completely
With the present unlimited, no-questions-asked solo powers of ONE SINGLE person ( the founder), I see it not even any reasons to talk about POB-fund.
Unless:
The POB fund is moved to a new, freshly created Hive account, with MULTI-SIGNATURE active private keys.
So only multi-sig signed transactions from this fund would be ever possible
Keys of this multi-sig fund will be in the hands of "council members"
I too think that the minimum of 100 POB should be raised or eliminated. I am leaning in favor of raised. This would help prevent users from another tribe moving en masse into POB and voting an individual with little stake into governance positions. POB can be acquired fairly rapidly with a few good posts and curation so a reasonable minimum stake to be involved in governance should not be an issue. We want those stepping into governance roles to be committed to the platform and community.
In my opinion this needs to continue to be discussed and the POB fund SHOULD be moved in order to continue to fund the platform, not sit liquid in one individuals wallet. Unless people make noise about it this wont be changed so discussing it is relevant and necessary.
I would already comment on POBfund as well. I had this same question regarding how it would be used.
I know @proofofbrainio probably isn't Satoshi Nakamoto. Sometimes I wonder though...
Wow this is brilliant, my favorite art is 12 and 13 any one who did well should be given a second chance but I hope it's not going to be more than 2 chances.
This is a big one over here, I hope it brings more value to the society when it’s fully implemented.
I follow all the decision for the establishment of POB governance. With the governance, POB can advocate all issues .
Although this is a great idea and I’m happy to put my full support behind it, without @proofofbrainio being involved, it doesn’t really have any teeth. That account holds too much of the POB and can shut down anything that he/she doesn’t like. Too centralised to put significant time and effort into at the moment. Until I hear from the controlling account, I am afraid everything will be of little bale at the moment. I hope I am wrong!