Welcome back to Vrbish! This week we are doing something a little different...

Proposal #26 went up for vote this week and became center-stage for a spirited debate. So today I thought it was important to pivot and discuss the issues that were observed during the voting process, and how we can improve this process moving forward.

Below are some key observations made during the most intense proposal vote to-date:

1. Having impact on the DAO’s direction is not decided purely by voting power 

With 156 votes, making up 0.18% of quorum, coolbeans objectively changed the outcome of this vote. He campaigned and rallied support by highlighting issues with the proposal and increasing awareness. 

It’s encouraging to see passionate community members at all scales of voting power make a difference! The most engaged voter tends to have the greatest influence. 

1. Should you be able to vote on your own proposal? 

One key issue raised by coolbeans was that the proposal creator accounted for, at one point, 50% of the voting quorum. This raised the alarm for me personally as it highlights a potential issue with the current voting structure.

One could theoretically drain the treasury by arbitraging the purchase of cheap votes and voting on expensive proposals. 

Should you be able to vote on your own proposal?

One argument is that the votes were earned fair and square, but how do we guard against the negative consequences? Coolbeans demonstrated one possible answer, by campaigning against bad proposals we can prevent this from happening. 

1. Fabricating community support

Some concerns were raised about the proposal creator voting from multiple different accounts. 

By checking recent blockchain transactions I was able to confirm that the proposal creator transferred Vrbs NFTs to new accounts, and these accounts then voted for the proposal and had the appearance of being different individuals. 

On the surface it appears that the proposal creator was attempting to make it seem like more community members were in support of his proposal by distributing his votes to multiple accounts. 

I have reached out to the proposal creator to open a dialogue and will be happy to issue a correction to my above conclusion if more facts come to light.

Transactions of concern are here on basescan, afo.eth (proposal creator) transferred Vrbs NFTs to this address, which were then transferred to an address that voted on the proposal as an independent individual: https://basescan.org/address/0x49fa954b6c2cd14b4b3604ef1cc17ced20a9e42c#nfttransfers

1. Proposals should be announced loudly

The easiest way to minimize the potential for bad actors (I’m not saying this proposal creator is necessarily a bad actor) is to shine more light on their efforts. We do this through awareness. Thanks to coolbeans campaign, more people became aware of this proposal and did their own research and voting, ultimately rejecting it.

Instead of relying on a coolbeans to speak up, perhaps there is a better way to announce proposals (to be fair, the creator DID announce his proposal in the /vrbs channel)?

Word on the street is that the proposal creator plans to hold a community discussion to answer concerns, make changes, and eventually resubmit the proposal for approval. So please, take a moment and review the original proposal below. Together we can make this proposal better!

https://vrbs.wtf/vrbs/dao/proposals/26