Cancel Chainanalysis ref

The purpose of this referendum is to allow the community to democratically vote specifically on the fact of if it is acceptable to resubmit a proposal that recently failed

The factors to consider are:

  • The proposal lost by a very small minority, it was very close to 50/50
  • The proposal mostly lost because of DV. Of course DV is democratic but no DV is even more democratic, that's probably why W3F is not willing to delegate root track to DV. The most important track of all must be truly democratic
  • The new proposal has significant improvements

The idea is that it is more rational and effective to split the debate into two different referendums, one about the form (if the practice is acceptable) and one about the substance (if it is a good deal)

Instead of mixing both into the single main referendum it's better to have two referendums, everyone can vote separately on the form (referendum canceler) and on the substance (main referendum) keeping both debates separate

This is more effective and more democratic

Reply
Up
Share
Status
Decision7d
Confirmation
3hrs
Attempts
2
Tally
50.9%Aye
50.0%Threshold
49.1%Nay
Aye
75.47MDOT
Nay
72.7MDOT
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%

    Threshold

  • 0.0%
Support
1.67%
23.66MDOT
Issuance
1.42BDOT
Votes
Nested
Flattened
Calls
Check how referenda works here.
Call
Metadata
Timeline8
Votes Bubble
Statistics
Comments
[Deleted Account]

You're such a manipulating btard, first you convince Chainalysis to repost their idiotic proposal and now you submit a ref to cancel it... Geez

Edited

Reply
Up 1
[Deleted Account]

image.png

Psychopathic! The Joker is the hero of the anti-status quo.

image.png

Enjoy.

Reply
Up 1
[Deleted Account]

you lose, can start over, so if you win (close to 50%) can also start over?
You voted with several whale accounts, controlled the vote,You're just a clown and a thief

Reply
Up