Uniswap simply calls it a “Governance Proposal”
Honestly, I’m not too hung up on any of the names we wish to use as they don’t matter legally as long as the process for each step is documented clearly.
Uniswap
I would prefer GP over RFP per my reasons shared above.
I don’t want use to use terms incorrectly. As yall can tell it matters to me 
sure, GP it’s a way better. RIP is an acronym that could trasmit a bad tone. Community is right the opposite than RIP
2 Likes
GP is ok by me as well, as it aligns well with not using “Radix” in anything 
I updated my post Naming / Terminology
I retract my lockup ideas and am for the snapshot approach 
The least amount of asset risk the better 
3 Likes
My preference for voting is LSU’s held at the time of vote.
1 Like
What are your thoughts on a proposal also referencing the temp check?
seems like a good idea, in the spec I shared a proposal can only originate from a temp check, and they reference each other.
3 Likes
SO what does this all mean for LSULP? They won’t be counted in voting?
How can the community not decide on the basis of voting. How can some individuals in a forum dictate LSU should be used over XRD. Not sure how you can say some who has held XRD for years doesn’t have skin in the game just because its not staked. Also just converting XRD to LSU and back is a taxable event. Same with conversion to LSULP. No you want me to reorder my entire portfolio just to participate in governance and worry about further taxable events.
This is a good point. What is a voting model that would work for you given the taxable event angle you shared?
I think XRD was not used because people can get loans and then have more voting power with said loan.
LSU means you also partecipate in the network security but also for me XRD should count, at least with a demultiplier. I always have some amount of XRD I don’t stake for some reason and i’d like that to be counted for voting
that could not be bad, because any usage of the chain is valuable, anyone can find its way to have more voting power.
Also, borrowing get you some risk so it is fair if you afford some risk for have more voting power
1 Like
Borrowed XRD can be converted to an LSU. How does that make sense?
Well this thread is basically saying stakers who do nothing on the network matter more then DeFi users when it comes to governance. Does that seem fair?
same here, i think xrd should count as well
Cross posted here as well:
Basically, because I felt it should be necessary to ensure that the voting “members” weren’t able to simply fly in and vote and then leave just as quickly. (i.e. Buy/pump; vote; Sell/dump)
Forcing a delay on the above implies they are generally more closely aligned with the success of the Radix network.
Users of the network e.g.
-traders with free XRD sitting in a wallet;
-LSULP employed in a DEX;
-users with assets locked in a lending protocol..etc
are merely “customers” of the network and are generally mercurial in their search for immediate yield (and there is NOTHING wrong with that).
However, they don’t generally concern themselves with the continuity of the network and will jump ship to the next platform that provides them better value (as ANY customer should).
Humorous examples for why they probably shouldn’t be included in the governance operations:
-
I buy hamburgers from McDonalds. I should have a say in how their operations are ran. Good luck with that.
-
Do Binance or Coinbase allow their customers to have a governance vote?
While wildly different in their scope, the above examples hopefully point out the differences between “customers of a network” and “members of an organization” that are collectively working to ensure the success of the network.
Isn’t this what snapshot voting is for. That is usually how most governance is run in crypto. Just ignoring XRD holders is disenfranchising a huge segment. There are many loyal DeFi users who have different strategies going on that would like to participate in governance and not have to be shackled to the amount of LSU in there wallet. There is also many users who want to hold XRD to be more liquid. Also conversion in and out of LSU can be a taxable event. This is a serious issue. I have to realise gains(mostly losses these days) just to participate in governance is ridiculous.
LSU can be bought and sold just like Xrd. I don’t see how just using lsu stops drive by voting. LSU were supposed to be a defi building block and primitive. Making them the sole unit of governance will indirectly penalize people who use them in DeFi. Which was there primary purpose not governance. Instead of using them for their intended purpose. You want to force people sit on them if they want to participate in governance.
1 Like