[GCP-003] - PASSED - Post-vote “reconsider” process

[shawn16400]

@DisruptionJoe

Put up a snapshot vote to ratify the revote process

Hi @DisruptionJoe
I don’t want to get too far ahead of ourselves, given this proposal has to pass first, but if it does pass, and the FDD budget fails to be taken up for reconsideration (either voted down, or not considered by the steward council) then you are correct, the FDD budget would have to be posted and ratified via Tally.

@shawn16400

B. If the Steward Council does not motion to “reconsider the vote”, or if a motion to “reconsider the vote” fails a majority vote, the original vote stands and must be executed as originally passed.

[kyle]

@shawn16400

If the Steward Council votes in the affirmative to “reconsider the vote”

Hey Shawn - Can you be more specific on what this structure looks like? How does the Steward council vote… is it a majority vote? is it that a member of that council presents the option to revote and a second member affirms the need for a revote, etc.

Would love to vote on this proposal but dont feel I have enough details to support yet.

[shawn16400]

Hi Kyle,
Thanks for the question. According to the text in the proposal, the steward council votes for a “reconsideration” or against a reconsideration using a simple majority vote. The reconsider motion is brought to the steward council via a CSDO member which meets the criteria.

The reference was obscure in the proposal, so thanks for asking the question and raising this up.

From the proposal:

@shawn16400

B. If the Steward Council does not motion to “reconsider the vote”, or if a motion to “reconsider the vote” fails a majority vote, the original vote stands and must be executed as originally passed.

Also, as I mentioned briefly in our quick discussion, we did not define a quorum for a decision takens by the Stewards Council. Said another way, what minimum number of Steward Council members should be in attendance before a vote can be called? Typically, a quorum is anywhere from a 51% (most common) to 66% (less common) of a voting body, as defined by that body. To avoid this turning into an issue in the future, I will add that topic for our next steward council election.

[lefterisjp]

Hmm this process though sounds nice, I can see it complicating the governance process and introducing a lot of strife.

In the motivation section you mention:

Without a controlled process in place, the DAO is at risk for being forced to implement outdated decisions, move in an uncoordinated fashion, or make inappropriate or unauthorized declarations in order to repeal decisions in a way that might cause the entire governance process to be called into question.

But can you perhaps give a more contrete example than in the specifications? Why should any member of the CSDO have the power to ask for a vote recondisderation?

I can see this being open to abuse and for creating impermanence in the way governance works.

[DisruptionJoe]

Here is the concrete example in which I’m pushing for a resolution that is fair/legitimate.

[S17 Proposal] INTEGRATED FDD Budget Request

Just want to come back to this (after reading comments) and provide a bit more context regarding my position: I have full confidence in Joe’s integrity, that he has been acting in good faith, and that he is deeply committed to serving Gitcoin DAO and its community. I hope no one see this process as a referendum on one person’s intentions. I have deep respect for the work FDD has provided to the DAO over the years and the impact it has had on Sybil defense (both practically, by preventing a…

[CoachJonathan]

Finally getting a chance to read through this. Kudos on the thoughtfulness behind this and I’m fully supportive.

One clarification I’d like:

@shawn16400

If the proposal is not brought by the original proposer within 7 days, the original vote is considered null and void.

I’m not 100% sure I understand this one sentence.
The original proposer can propose again - great.
And if they don’t propose, then what happens?
If the vote is being "reconsidered, isn’t the vote considered null and void regardless?

Once I get this answer, I will be sure to vote

[lefterisjp]

Okay I see. In such a case a process for a revote makes sense. I am going to vote in favour

[shawn16400]

@CoachJonathan

If the vote is being "reconsidered, isn’t the vote considered null and void regardless?

Hey @CoachJonathan thanks for the question - and yes, you are correct. After a motion to reconsider has passed, the original vote is essentially dead and the 7 day deadline is a bit redundant. The intent of the 7 day timeline was to prompt the original proposer to move with haste to get the issue to resolution, or to accept the issue dead. When we get to a point of writing a constitution (summation of governance processes) we could simplify the proposal and clean that up a bit.

[kyle]

It looks like this proposal passed! Congrats to the team working on this, and thanks for submitting the Governance Process change.