Sometimes there are proposals submitted that may have extreme widespread approval or disapproval by the community, yet the currently elected council may choose to vote in a way that goes for or against this expectation. For the average tokenholder there is no way to meaningfully express their approval/disapproval with the proposal except to be very vocal on Discord or another off-chain platform--this type of messaging obviously does not take into account how much stake they have in the platform and therefore is of perhaps dubious value.
(side note: at the current point in time, there are many random situations that result in proposals that the council may have to vote on but were not expressly elected to deal with)
The best example of this kind of proposal may be in the form of the following proposal:
https://pioneerapp.xyz/#/proposals/preview/439 (2x The Council Salary)
Although this proposal was eventually rejected due to the council's votes, it experienced a dramatically high level of discussion (off chain) and was essentially refused. In this event the token holders had no actionable way of objecting to this proposal which was representative of their stake on the platform. Besides submitting comments on-chain and off-chain expressing distaste for the proposal (which does not correlate in any meaningful way to how much stake they have on the platform) it did not equate to showcasing how much stake was involved in this particular decision.
Solution
Allow for a way for users to "pointless vote" for/against a proposal with no actionable impact on it (i.e. they would purely be visually staking tokens to express support/against a proposal. This would effectively be useless (expect perhaps to inform future election results) but just be a way of displaying their support/non-support for a proposal.)
Stake should be attached to the vote and should be locked as long as the proposal is still in the voting phase and then released once it has executed.
In essence, although the above described action ("pointless vote") is essentially meaningless, it can inform the council + voters about future elections and how actual stakeholders feel about a proposal--a user expressing distaste for a current proposal who has no stake is quite different to one who is able to stake 5% of the total supply temporarily to say they oppose/support said proposal.
This staking action could be measured via a barometer which showcases community support/non-support for a proposal and act as a good measure for understanding how in-line the currently elected council is with the proposals they are given.
Problem
Sometimes there are proposals submitted that may have extreme widespread approval or disapproval by the community, yet the currently elected council may choose to vote in a way that goes for or against this expectation. For the average tokenholder there is no way to meaningfully express their approval/disapproval with the proposal except to be very vocal on Discord or another off-chain platform--this type of messaging obviously does not take into account how much stake they have in the platform and therefore is of perhaps dubious value.
(side note: at the current point in time, there are many random situations that result in proposals that the council may have to vote on but were not expressly elected to deal with)
The best example of this kind of proposal may be in the form of the following proposal: https://pioneerapp.xyz/#/proposals/preview/439 (
2x The Council Salary) Although this proposal was eventually rejected due to the council's votes, it experienced a dramatically high level of discussion (off chain) and was essentially refused. In this event the token holders had no actionable way of objecting to this proposal which was representative of their stake on the platform. Besides submitting comments on-chain and off-chain expressing distaste for the proposal (which does not correlate in any meaningful way to how much stake they have on the platform) it did not equate to showcasing how much stake was involved in this particular decision.Solution
Allow for a way for users to "pointless vote" for/against a proposal with no actionable impact on it (i.e. they would purely be visually staking tokens to express support/against a proposal. This would effectively be useless (expect perhaps to inform future election results) but just be a way of displaying their support/non-support for a proposal.)
Stake should be attached to the vote and should be locked as long as the proposal is still in the voting phase and then released once it has executed.
In essence, although the above described action ("pointless vote") is essentially meaningless, it can inform the council + voters about future elections and how actual stakeholders feel about a proposal--a user expressing distaste for a current proposal who has no stake is quite different to one who is able to stake 5% of the total supply temporarily to say they oppose/support said proposal.
This staking action could be measured via a barometer which showcases community support/non-support for a proposal and act as a good measure for understanding how in-line the currently elected council is with the proposals they are given.