[Community Review] Pre-discussion: 6th NumbersDAO voting topic community review

[Steffdarz]

Topic: Redirect Unsuccessful DAO Proposal Stakes to the Treasury

Overview

Dear Numbers DAO, I hope everyone is doing well. As a dedicated member of this DAO, I am proposing an amendment to our current DAO proposal process. Under the current system, members are required to stake 5,000 NUM when submitting a proposal. If the proposal is successful, these NUMs are returned; however, if the proposal fails, the NUMs are burnt.

I suggest that instead of burning the 5,000 NUM tokens staked for unsuccessful proposals, we should redirect these tokens to the DAO’s treasury.

In the following sections, I will outline the rationale behind this proposal, detail its potential benefits, and address concerns that may arise if this proposal is approved. I aim to provide you with an impartial analysis that equips you with the necessary information to understand the dialogue that will take place during the upcoming DAO meeting. Remember, this review is not meant to sway your opinion but to encourage open dialogue and engagement.

Rationale behind this proposal

Resource Utilization: Although burning tokens might be beneficial for deflationary assets like NUM, redirecting them to the DAO treasury could lead to better utilization of these assets. Encouraging Participation: The current system may deter members from submitting proposals due to the risk of losing tokens. By redirecting tokens to the treasury, even unsuccessful proposals contribute to the DAO, which could encourage more active participation and innovative ideas. Financial Health: Adding tokens to the treasury can strengthen the DAO’s financial position, allowing for more impactful projects and investments.

Here we outline the potential pros and cons that will come with this change.

Pros

• Sustainable Growth : Replenishing the treasury with these tokens can contribute to the long-term sustainability and growth of the DAO. 5,000 NUM may not seem much for some people, but with growing interest and members of the Numbers DAO, we could expect to see more proposals being submitted.
• Member Engagement : Reducing the risk associated with submitting proposals can lead to a more engaged and active community.
• Economic Efficiency & Financial Strengthening of the DAO : This approach is economically efficient as it recycles tokens within the ecosystem instead of eliminating them. The additional tokens in the treasury can provide more funding for future projects, grants, or community initiatives.

Cons

• Risk of Low-Quality Proposals : If there's less at stake for individuals submitting proposals, it could potentially lead to an increase in proposals that are not well-thought-out or are not in the best interest of the DAO.
• Treasury Management : The increased flow of tokens into the treasury will require more details to the treasury management and decision-making process.

Conclusion

This proposal aims for a more dynamic and economically robust DAO environment. By redirecting the tokens from unsuccessful proposals to our treasury, we can enhance both the DAO financial strength and our community engagement. I look forward to the community’s thoughts and perspectives on this proposal.

It is important to note that Numbers Protocol remains neutral in this discussion and I encourage all stakeholders to engage in open dialogue and share their perspectives.

Together, let us shape the future of Numbers Protocol and work towards a more decentralized and inclusive ecosystem, driven by the collective wisdom of our community. Your voice matters, and I look forward to the outcome of what hopefully is a critical decision in NumbersDAO young history.

Thank you for being an integral part of the Numbers Protocol journey!

Entering Community Review

Just like previous DAO meetings topics, this Numbers Governance Proposal will undergo community review until December 11. During this time, I encourage the Numbers community to share their thoughts and concerns on GitHub issues and discuss openly on our many social channels regarding this proposal. I look forward to hearing your feedback!

┆Issue is synchronized with this Asana task by Unito

[Visijo]

The decision to redirect unsuccessful DAO proposal stakes to the treasury has both benefits and drawbacks. The benefits include increased treasury funds for initiatives, discourages frivolous proposals, and encourages more thoughtful proposals. However, the drawbacks include penalizing proposers, creating an additional barrier to entry for new members or those with limited resources, and potentially leading to a "slush fund." The decision should be made based on the long-term success of the DAO and considering the potential benefits and drawbacks of this approach. The DAO community should carefully consider the decision based on the best interests of the organization

[Probiduc]

I appreciate the thoughtful proposal to redirect unsuccessful DAO proposal stakes to the treasury. The pros of sustainable growth and increased member engagement are compelling, but the cons, particularly the risk of low-quality proposals, raise valid concerns. Looking forward to community discussions to find a balanced solution!

[emmerson121]

In as much as the Pros and Cons has some advantages and disadvantages, redirecting unsuccessful DAO to the treasury will further improve credibility and transparency instead of burning it. If returned to the treasury, a measure should be set to oversee how the NUMs are spent or saved. Looking forward to the community involvement of this critical topic.

[Bikso1]

Redirecting unsuccessful DAO proposal stakes to the Treasury ensures a sustainable and efficient allocation of resources, maximizing the collective benefit for the community's growth and development, so I support it 👍

[Westpaiid]

I prefer the normal burning since we have already accustomed to that pattern, although change is constant but my stand remains 👍

[Karen5-hub]

Redirecting unsuccessful DAO proposal stakes to the Treasury, in my view, guarantees a sustainable allocation of resources for the community's growth. I support this for maximizing collective benefits. However, I still stand by the traditional burning method, as we are accustomed to it, despite the constant nature of change. 👍

[TylerDylan]

The strategic choice to channel unsuccessful DAO proposal stakes into the treasury reflects a nuanced approach, fostering a balance between augmenting financial resources for meaningful initiatives and mitigating the influx of frivolous proposals. This methodology not only stimulates a more thoughtful proposal culture but also safeguards the DAO's long-term viability. However, the decision is not without its complexities, as it introduces concerns like penalizing proposers and creating entry barriers for new or resource-constrained members. Careful deliberation within the DAO community is imperative, ensuring alignment with the organization's overarching goals while navigating the potential pitfalls of this innovative approach.

[Cpat29]

Redirecting unsuccessful DAO proposal stakes to the treasury brings both merit and demerit to investors alike.

This benefits include bolstering treasury funds for new initiatives, discouraging frivolous proposals, and fostering more thoughtful submissions. However, certain demerit involve penalizing proposers, creating barriers for newcomers or those with fewer resources, and the risk of accumulating an excessively large treasury.

The decision hinges on the DAO's long-term success. Careful consideration is necessary, weighing the potential pros and cons to ensure it aligns with the organization's best interests. Balancing allurement and fairness while avoiding unnecessary barriers is crucial for a healthy and sustainable DAO ecosystem.

[fredlex]

Considering the pros which outweighs the cons, I think it will be more beneficial to implement Redirect Unsuccessful DAO Proposal Stakes to the Treasury, this will also lead to more idea and contributions from the community.
However, critical measures should be taken into considerations before implementation.

[Carina470]

Channeling unfulfilled DAO proposal stakes into the Treasury ensures a resilient distribution of resources to foster community expansion. I advocate for this approach to h shared advantages. Nevertheless, I remain steadfast in endorsing the conventional burning method, honoring our familiarity with it amid the perpetual evolution of circumstances.

[ParamedicArt]

The amount that will be burned should never be put into use. The deflationary structure must be preserved. In a bull market, any increase in circulation will decrease the price. Even if the burn amount is to be used, it can only be used once for listing on an exchange such as Binance by not burning the burn amount in 1 quarter.

[Steffdarz]

Thanks for everyone's input on this topic. We will close this community review and post the recap once it's done!