Referenda #162
0x436f6e7369646572204841434e4120616e204163746976697374205374616b65686f6c6465722e2041414720697320696d70726f76696e672e20456d7068617369736520646973636f75727365206f6e20326e642070617274206f66206f757220566f74696e6720506f6c6963792e2057652076616c756520707269766163792e
Show More
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a0a8f/a0a8f26895ba7307f46ffb759f76b95b384a2ded" alt=""
Interesting... now we know you're watching the AAG.
Jay will be very proud of you, lol
ChaosDAO, in efforts to bolster transparency within the community, has offered the below rationale for its decision to abstain on Referendum 162.
As noted in our previous response from HACN’s on-chain remark with referendum 157 (https://kusama.polkassembly.io/referenda/157), HACN has used on-chain remarks to interface with the community. Given HACN’s significant holding of KSM, their opinion has a large sway on the success of various referenda.
This on-chain remark highlighted the retroactive funding bias outlined in ref 157, but also pointed out the improved discourse of governance through AAG also known as Attempts at Governance. AAG is a weekly segment run by The Kusamarian’s Jay Chrwanna. Every Monday, engaged community members, such Leemo and Phunky from ChaosDAO, sit down and discuss governance items facing the community.
HACN seems to appreciate this discourse and we as a DAO do as well. HACN does seem to favor anonymity which we value, however, many in the DAO believe using on-chain remarks and clogging the chain in this way is a suboptimal means of communication. Others see that this may be one way to spread the message to multiple people in the ecosystem as comments are often missed.
Regardless, we voted abstain given the nature of this referendum was purely for communicative purposes
9% Aye 91% Abstain
Discover similar proposals