Hello @jengajojo, thanks for your feedback!
- It is not possible to token gate this forum, so I suggest running the election panel poll in discord. There is a question on who would be allowed to vote, in which case, we can integrate collab land to autoverify token holders and give them a role.
Good point. Tbh, I did not think about this aspect, so Im open to any ideas on how to do it better. Your suggestion looks good from the point of view that confirmed EUL holders will be allowed. On the other hand, there is a risk of gamification of the system (it is not difficult to create multiple accounts with 1 EUL). The pros for the Forum poll is that it is easier to identify active users and give them a vote. On the other hand, there is no guarantee that they poses at least 1 EUL. Those are more my thoughts out loud. As I mentioned, I did not come up with an ideal system and open for suggestions.
- How many folks can be part of the first election panel? I suggest max. 7 members
I was thinking about 5. with the top 5 candidates receiving the most votes being selected to be a part of the Election Panel
- On top of the fixed remuneration for Senior Delegates, I suggest adding a variable component. This can either be a function of the number of proposals or a simple coordinape round between the delegates.
I do not pretend to have the final word here and it should be a collective decision. But I would strongly oppose a variable component, at least for the beginning of the programme. My main question here is how to measure the profoundness of the contribution? For example, let’s take my latest [RFC] Convert FTT reserves to ETH and Bankless [RFC] Promote BUSD to Collateral Tier. With both of them seem to be meaningfully contribute to the protocol, if I had to say which one is better (in terms of profoundness, time and efforts spent, analysis made etc) and who should be rewarded more, I would definitely vote for Bankless. There is a number other examples of such kind. My main point is that it is quite easy to estimate quantity but very difficult to assess quality of the contribution.
Have you conducted a survey to test if we can get atleast 10 candidates given this criteria?
That is a very good question! Originally, I was thinking about making criteria more strict. But then I made a survey for the top-20 most active members of the Forum (the table was made some days ago, so maybe the list has slightly changed) and realised that some most active contributors will unlikely to join the selection campaign. In this regard I opted for more moderate requirements. Additionally, I can expect that this proposal will not passed easily, hehe, so active people who do not meet criteria atm, will be able to do that by the time the proposal is voted. Here is a piece of analysis I made. Probably it Will not give answers to all your questions, but hope it will bring light to the logic behind the criteria SD - Google Sheets.