Minimum Duration to Revisit a Topic After Voting

As we are already seeing with discussions on the logo, I would like us to give some thought about how often voting should occur on a given topic to keep members of the DAO and DAO Stewards from getting flooded by the same proposals. Somewhat akin to people asking โ€œwen Lambo?โ€ in the telegram chat.

The duration a topic is considered settled should be built into our DAO proposals so that it is clear when next the subject can be re-visited. This shouldnโ€™t be allowed to get too complicated. Should we add the earliest date a topic will be revisited to the proposal language, to communicate how long the decision will last, near what voting YES or voting NO means?

Examples:
Once / Semi-Permanent: Core Identity / Logo / Smart Contract Edits/Rewrites / Etc.
Annually: Exchange listing / liquidity proposals.
Seasonally: Adding Stewards to the DAO,
Monthly: How much Akita to send Baphnedia. :stuck_out_tongue:
As-Needed: New proposals as are developed in Akita Discourse.

2 Likes

most proposals should be thought out and timelines should be expressed as part of that proposal.

I see what you are saying in regards to logo discussion and also the Steward term-length, so I would agree those could be defined better.

Exchange listings should be able to be discussed whenever, same with liquidity proposals โ€“ ultimately they will be subject to the budget at hand, so it might be better to discuss specific budget allocations happening so that a listing and/or liquidity budget can be grown and managed.

2 Likes