It would be great to include the current multisig in this post, so the community will understand the current size of the multisig and the individuals who make it up before voting for an expansion.
I agree with the general idea that we need people who will engage, judge and cast their vote for a new transaction, but I donât believe that the solution is to add more individuals because we need speed, alternatively I would like to see a restructure with inactive people getting replaced by individuals who have communityâs trust and they want to actively participate.
The multi-sigâs role is not to judge if a trade is âproperâ. Thatâs absurd. Thatâs the Treasurerâs job (for whatever reason, this Treasurer hasnât been a success yet). The multi-sig is there to ensure funds are not stolen in blatantly fraudulent transactions. They are by no means an âinvestment committeeâ!
Putting a 90-day overhang on the new Treasurer was a bad idea even before it was implemented, and many voiced this. Itâs absurd. What I donât understand is why itâs hard for our TM to make any moves while Danny Sesta is able to lose $9M in the blink of an eye protecting Abra. Does Danny know how to code, or so anything other than putting lego pieces together to leverage other peoples work in brilliant albeit unoriginal ways? Sorry if I upset some of you worshippers, but this is fâing business. Not idolatry.
