I just saw @AvsA closed this post saying the proposal for funding metagovernance term 5 group did not pass.
I found that surprising since there is a clear “FOR” majority.
Only after looking at the rules more closely as defined here did I see that for social proposals not only does it need majority but majority should be > 50%. I knew of the 1% quorum but not of this rule.
Social proposals have a quorum requirement of 1% and require a minimum approval of 50% to pass.
I propose to add these requirements in every snapshot vote at the very top in bold as the requirements for the vote. Better yet if snapshot itself can make it obvious there is such a limit.
I am more worried about the fact that it has not reached the quorum. All social proposals, and the all the working group rules for how they work, and the “standard practice” on how to do things, is really just a dress rehearsal for the vote that actually matters: the on chain vote.
On chain votes have a hard quorum of 1M votes, if we don’t reach it, the proposal fails and we all wasted gas. Not reaching quorum on a social proposal makes me uncomfortable to risk an executable one, so we would prefer to listen to feedback and do it right.
It’s not an emergency, we have funds to cover operations for a while.
Does the same rule apply to onchain votes? You use tally here with the standard governor right? As far as I know the quorum is defined as vote participation. Abstaining counts as participation.
As you can see in the screenshot the quorum of 1M votes is reached. 800k + 689k + 144k > 1M.
Unless I’m mistaken, Tally (or governor) only counts “For” and “Abstain” votes towards the quorum sum. It does not count “Against” votes. @lefterisjp
Sure, but instead of debating the merits and very definition of “approval” I think it’s better to address the issues that were raised in a new vote.
Hm I am not debating anything. Read the OP topic please.
I propose to add these requirements in every snapshot vote at the very top in bold as the requirements for the vote. Better yet if snapshot itself can make it obvious there is such a limit.
I am simply saying that this requirement is easy to miss and should be made clear when voting. One such way is to put it in the proposal text in snapshot at the very top. Open to other suggestions.
Didn’t mean you’re debating, but rather that I would rather not have that technicality discussion and prefer to consider it failed for practical purposes.
You’re not wrong that the exact rules aren’t obvious
Hi Lefteris, I think this is a good suggestion, and it would help participants understand the requirements for a Social Proposal to pass. I will personally recommend that proposers add this notice to their Snapshot Proposals moving forward.
I will also add this notice to the Voting Period Bulletin whenever a new proposal is on the ballot.
