Hey guys this may fall on deaf ears but here’s a thought. We have an amazing set of founders handling the treasury and a great dev team working tirelessly to improve the system,website,partnerships they are building out a very impressive ecosystem. They see things we don’t see. They know things we don’t know . Why don’t we let them make proposals before we shut down to their ideas. Why don’t we let their vision come to light. I’m not saying we need to be yes men but I do believe they have the daos best interest at heart as if we succeed they succeed. I see crusades on this board about lockups. Why the volume benefits us the fees benefit us. So why not let people pay them they are likely loosing every time they try it. I see a big push against an idea sifu has floated in discord. Let’s wait for him to post the medium on it and see what the whole plan is instead of crying about muh apy. While inflation isent a problem yet we all have to realize it is on the horizon and solid proposals and plans will keep the project healthy and growing. Just my two cents but I think we should let the founders do what they do best and we should keep community focus on our culture and how we can help not how we can gain control. Thank you for reading
I agree with you, but I think is important that the community says what they think should be improved. Let’s just keep discussing. The devs will bring some topic to be discussed too so I dont think we need to worry.
But I also agree that people are being harsh with Sifu, let the man think
I’m not against discussion but it just looks like half of the boards are how to lockup funds and half are forward planning is stupid type noise that will drown out alot of good ideas for investor base expansion and community growth as a whole
I agree completely, and us voicing ideas to them helps them brainstorm too. They can still submit their proposals and have us vote on them but we can work as a community to aid them in their process.
This is not he point of your topic, but i just wanted to mention that in my point of view not all decisions should be discussed now or in the future. Especially when it comes to treasury management. Democracy is not always providing us with the best decision. I really like how governance nowadays provides DAO with idea meritocracy (shout out to Ray Dalio) but in kinda broken way.
Meritocracy, which is really important and efficient, implies to weight opinions based on person’s competence. So basically if 5 competent people say NO and 10 not competent / less competent people say YES - answer to this question / proposal most likely will be YES. In this way of thinking developers and Daniele himself are more competent than a huge amount of people.
Of course they shouldn’t make radical decision without community acknowledgement but some basic operations (especially, as I said, with the treasury; like small rebalancing or buying small amounts < 25M of some assets) imo can be made without any strong discussions with folks.
I understand that my opinion can be kinda radical and I also apologise for potential mistakes - I am not a native speaker. This is a really raw cut of my ideas but potentially meritocracy in an improved way have a place to be in the future Wonderland governance scheme!
yeah you have a point, I can not take these anti-whales posts anymore. 1 thread is enough but looks like for every 5 topics 4 is about that.
people just stopped looking into the topics and decided to create their own repeting the existing ones and it is so boring. It reminds me of the subreddit