Increase the SEFI proposal submission from 1 million to 2.5 million

Hi,

This proposal increases the threshold for proposal submission from 1 million to 2.5 million. We need larger players in this space. Since market capitalization is still low, this is the time to implement rules that can future proof our governance system. Individuals should still be able to pool their SEFI in a smart contract to reach this amount if they can’t do so themselves. I worry about the future quality of proposals if the threshold limit is too low. This proposal amount is more in line with Uniswap. Here is some inspiration behind this proposal.
https://app.boardroom.info/uniswap/proposal/cHJvcG9zYWw6dW5pc3dhcDphcmNoaXZlOjQ=

By voting YES, you acknowledge that the proposal submission threshold increases from 1 million to 2.5 million SEFI. You agree that individuals who can’t reach this threshold should team together to create the proposal. Some proposed benefits for this increase include, but are not limited to more tailored proposals, less spam, and more participation in governance (meetings, etc.) It would encourage increased participation from individuals in governance meetings which could further streamline the process and expedite change within the ecosystem.

Thanks for your time,
Phil

3 Likes

Personally, I think this goes a bit too far with respect to gatekeeping the gov proposals. I totally get the impetus for this to be honest because I feel like proposals 30 and 31 were extremely poorly written, failed to build from a forum post, and were just all around a bad look (although I do support the idea of adding a sefi airdrop claim button to the interface for those who missed claiming last year).

My problem with this is really that only so many people can amass this much SEFI. Like, the current SIP contains almost 129m SEFI meaning that the theoretical maximum is 51 people who can make proposals (in practice it will be much smaller). Of course, the SIP will grow but 2.5m SEFI is like 0.72% of all SEFI that exist. I guess I just feel this is a bridge too far toward centralization.

7 Likes

Thanks for sharing. I would like to add that we’ve talked about an option (governance meeting) to allow individuals to pool together to create proposals in the case that they don’t have enough SEFI. In my opinion, random SEFI Infinity Pool stakers coming together to create proposals would be the epitome of decentralization. Since SEFI is private, it may even increase participation in the governance process. Proposal writers would have to plan with more due diligence in order to convince others to support.

3 Likes

I like your guys’ discussion on this. In general we always wanted the gatekeeping to be low, but also didn’t want our novel governance module to tailspin into being a bathroom stall. I don’t consider Props 30/31 to be acting in good faith, and obviously they didn’t follow the proper governance format. I’m not a huge fan of continuously raising the bar higher to exclude unknown people we assume won’t meet the next threshold, but something does have to be done. We could more rigorously remove things from the UI, though that’s a hefty Centralized action we’ve tried to use sparingly. I do like the idea about having multiple people pool together to start a prop… we should talk more about that on Wednesdays committee meeting.

I think right now I’m most a fan of just removing props that don’t have accompanying forum posts, and if an address does it twice, creating a way that bans that address from making proposals. If they want to migrate sefi to a new wallet to do it again then they have to go through the 10-day lockup period.

Again about the current proposals in question… it hasn’t worked since September, and we had the airdrop open for many more months than most in the Cosmos Ecosystem. Having a broken and unusable button really didn’t help anything on the UI side.

2 Likes

I don’t understand why props are being removed from the UI. What purpose does this serve? Censorship is never good IMO.

1 Like

I could literally go and create a proposal that says “Elie likes butts” and put the nuclear codes behind it. Things that have been removed are not real proposals.

I mean, they didn’t remove 30/31 which is a total shit proposal (I say that despite wanting the “claim sefi” button to be back on the secretswap)…and it’s repeated. Doesn’t really support a claim of censorship imo.

3 Likes

Well sure, but I mean if they were submitted on chain, they should remain. I think people can differentiate between legitimate props and low quality non-practical ones. Just for the sake of decentralization.

1 Like

Ideally, it’d be nice to lower the barrier to post a proposal and add a deposit requirement with the option to vote “no w/ veto (slash this deposit).”

This is getting ridiculous. What’s next? 100 million min? so only a handful of insiders can create proposals? There has to be a better way.

1 Like

I personally don’t agree to increase the limit to 2.5 Million .instead introduce lockup period for the governance proposal and also introduce slab based slashing for failed proposal based on how much qorum they have met . Increasing the sefi limit will increase centralization and they are high chances to loose valuable proposal from non whale candidates.

2 Likes

You´re the one spamming you fk entitled retard like 25k$ worth of Sefi is not already enough. You can shove this proposal up your ass, if this happens I´ll sell my Sefi and just go away.

well, apparently 1 million sefi isn’t enough to stop proposal spamming as demonstrated by OP. If this fails for the 2nd time OP, are you planning on recreating this proposal forever until it passes?
The irony is that in the uniswap proposal OP links to, they actually vote to reduce proposal submission threshold from 10MM to 2.5MM. We’re going from 1 million (which is a decently high bar already) to 2.5 MM.

I like some of the other ideas such as removing proposals without accompanying forums posts, no w/ veto, etc, and I sincerely hope this proposal fails (again!), for the sake of sefi’s decentralized future.

1 Like

I didn’t submit proposal 37. I don’t know who did. I’ve accepted that proposal 36 has failed. I’m not opposed to ideas of removing redundant proposals.

Phil

you guys should be ashamed, i´m out

1 Like

Uau, how the fuck this just pass??? 13 Millions Sefi vote yes to this shit pass. Now we need 20% of all this votes just to submit an idea, good work!!
Im with you guys since the beggining, you give me like 4000 SEfi on the airdrop and just keep buying until now. Jesus, very sad man im selling all and never comeback

how the fuck put a barrier of 2.5 million it will increase the participation on governance? If i have an idea i should need to talk to 54323 people that agree only to the idea be avaliated? No man this should not work like this. What is the difference between 1 million and 2.5 million? With 1 million the mayority of people will also need to talk to other people to acept the idea, but is not that hard as 2.5…

Seems we have a follow on this proposal

Yes. Solid proposal. I support this and voted in favor. Let’s get this passed.

1 Like