@lee0007, thank you so much for this very well written post.
As to the relevant points that you mention:
-
I agree with what @daniel-ospina points out as to the need of not exactly specifying the tooling. In my opinion we shoult intend “Reasonable means” as something like “the prevailing social network platforms and communication tools used by the AN DAO community from time to time”. It would clarify what is intended (e.g. Discord, Forum and Twitter), but without nominate them.
-
Quorum is low, but I think that it corresponds to the actual engagement that we have in this community. So I would bring it to 0.3%. Otherwise I fear that we will remain stucked with this text. As to the meaning of majority (and also for the quorum), the problem are the “abstentions” and votes with more than 2 options. It seems to me that abstentions were used in the AN DAO to meet the quorum. I would frankly indicate in the Charter that abstentions do not count as a vote and do not count for the quorum. In addition, I would specify that the option that gets more votes prevails. In fact, we should also consider cases in which ANT holders will be required to select among three or more different options (e.g. 20 days; 30 days; 40 days). In these cases the 50% rule would not make so much sense. An alternative could be that we require only dual votes.
-
I think that the modifications proposed by @lee0007 as to the periods to express the vote are reasonable. I support them!
