I can assure you I have no intention of just making proposals willy nilly for anyone. Anything I make a proposal on will be thoroughly reviewed with good faith attempts at reaching a soft consensus and having the proposals reviewed before I even post them. Keep in mind if I act stupid it's very easy to fire me. I think trying to put a number on this just means we could either be pushing proposals just to hit a number or end up backlogging proposals for the next month. I'd rather it just work organically and if its a problem we'll deal with it.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
If there was some wording in here about the DAO manager can not pay the DEC cost for player proposals, I don't disagree with the concept. and i can agree to not having a set number.
If if its not clearly stated, then we cant hold the DAO manager accountable. Just like the proposal passed to ban battle helpers from modern, by simply putting it in the TOS.
if this proposal doesn't say , then we cant hold the DAO manager accountable.
I think that's the most reasonable way to word it. Outright putting "will not make a proposal for another player" seems very open to interpretation when I'm having ongoing discussions with the community throwing out ideas. It would be easy to say I just made someone's proposal. If you check out how we're doing things in the discord right now you'll probably see what I mean. These topics are getting battled over and I'm not making any proposals without getting to a point where there's a solid majority in agreement.
Fair enough. I had played around with trying to figure out a number and some kind of "good faith" agreement on how I'd use it, but ultimately it felt like trying to validate that I wasn't going to try to get myself fired 🤣 I'll clarify that I cannot make random player proposals.
Without meaning to sound rude, assurances aren't worth anything contractually speaking, and especially in the crypto space, something legally binding is needed