On the 15th and the 30th providing it’s not a weekend. If it’s a weekend, it’ll be moved to the next weekday. Or if everyone agrees to do it on weekend, then it’ll always be the weekend nearest to the 15th or the 30th. During the meeting, the council will discuss and deliberate. After that, the council will vote and put their position into writing.
As mentioned, there will be no cost to the CU DAO so no other additional benefits will be allocated apart from the NFT Badges mentioned above. Hope that helps!
As for finding the correct candidates, we understand that we do not want to elect the wrong people. We also do not want that to happen! Our official stand as Laguna Games, though, is that we will remain neutral during the nomination and during the election. We will not endorse anybody nor teach anybody how to choose their candidates. We will also not gate the nomination to certain groups of users. We will, however, continue to encourage an open discussion so that everyone will be able to make an informed decision. I think you’re doing a good job in engaging people in that discussion so please keep it up! ^^
We are working, however, on an addendum to the proposal that’s will allow the community to motion for a vote of no confidence if any of the elected council member stops contributing or if they start voting against the good of the community/DAO. ^^
This proposal makes a lot of sense, but I think it is too soon. I would much rather have a longer period of centralized, experienced decision-making as we head into what could be a long bear. Aron and the team have served us well, I recommend they continue to play the role they do and postpone this council step for at least 6 months.
What are we voting on here?
To give Axie Labs sole access to genetics info to be paid to build a tool with?
Or did they figure it out and are proposing to provide public access to it for payment?
If they already have broken the genome and are offering to build a tool with that info, then I am interested; but if this proposal will require the CU team to provide data on how to read genetics to Axie Labs while nobody else has access to that info still, then it’s a hard no from me.
I love this proposal !
It is fair and refreshing. I am so proud, looking forward to everything you guys have in the works and can’t wait to see this council form and flourish. Thank you for always looking out Team ! Best.
Understood now everything in my end is clear thank you.
just a side note tho. some of the future canditates may need to spend their time on these meetings and I would encourage the team to consider providing them with monthly rewards while they are on their term. like other projects [Illuvium] they have a governnance and the “Councils” are provided with a certain amount of tokens to ensure that their councils will perform to expertise. this is also a form of encouragement since they will be there helping the community within 6 months.
I personally wouldn’t mind If I run for council as this is only on my free time, but if we are going to take certain professionals or experts on their degree. thier time should atleast be well renumerated with a fair value. this way certain experts who are on their field will be more encouraged to provide their services or even push them to go run for council and we dont just attract the ones who “would like to do this for a badge”. While at the end of the day. the community can select to the top 20 that will be for selection on the seats. We also need to ensure that the people who are running will be a wide band of experts. bad guys will run regardless of the amount you will be giving them. the good guys always have a measure of level for them to run for council.
Totally hear you. Not to worry! This is something we can revisit if and when the Governance Council responsibilities expand. For now, these are the only expectations:
You will attend a twice monthly review of draft proposals.
You will publish your position and recommendations upon rejecting a draft proposal which will get compiled into a report for the community.
As you have cited Illuvium, then you’re also aware that their Governance Council have more responsibilities compared to what we’re initially proposing the CU Governance Council will be expected to do. The other Governance-related functions will remain within the Laguna Games Team during this early stage. Patience, my friend. This is a multi-year development. ^^
As for the availability you mentioned, I’d like to reassure you that while the community can nominate a person, it’ll still be up to the individual to decide whether to run for the position or not - even if they make it to the top 20! The top 20 nominees will be given time to withdraw their candidacy before we put it to a vote on Snapshot so anyone who may be unable to serve for any reason will not be forced to. It’ll be to the benefit of the community to allow only those who are really willing to serve be be elected! ^^
6 months is a lot of time and a lot can change so to really project it forward I have to say it. its important that the rules are flexible and it is open for revision.
I think it’s a little too early. The game needs to establish itself and be on a growth path and till then the team needs to lead from the front. We are still having bugs, locked assets on OS, economic problems, barier to entry problems, bear market conditions, etc. and the game is yet to even takeoff.
The Motion of No Confidence is greatly appreciated. Thanks Team for looking out and hearing community suggestions. I am so excited to see this through and trust that this is only another stepping stone to the greater success of CU.
Hope that helps!