GM 
– About SandDex –
I really appreciate you are trying to help solving the quorum “issue”. Thanks!
As a reminder, while seeming high, the 30m VP quorum only reprensent less than 1% of the total circulating voting power. The quorum exist to protect the DAO from passing SIPs validated by only a handfull of voters, and ensure a democratic process. That being said, we do indeed need more voters. As shared in the operation team weekly update, we are trying to solve it by different means:
We also try to push for engagement with the 2 following SIPs
- SIP-10: Regional activation through events in SEA and Latam (SIP rejected)
- SIP-11: The Sandbox DAO to Fund the Sandbox Ambassador Program
Now the idea of putting together a repository of wallet addresses associated to Voting Power and name/email/username, aka “SandDex” poses several compliance and general issues:
- Data privacy
- Operational management
- From the point of view of the LAND Owner
1: From a data privacy point of view, GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) indicates that processing personal data is generally prohibited, unless it is expressly allowed by law, or the data subject has consented to the processing. While being one of the more well-known legal bases for processing personal data, consent is only one of six bases mentioned in the GDPR. The others are: contract, legal obligations, vital interests of the data subject, public interest and legitimate interest.
Generally speaking: email, and username are considered PII (Privately Identifiable Information), because we cannot know if a person’s self selected username are the same as their real name. Therefore it’s collection and usage must be subjected to the owners explicit approval.
In this particular case, having accepted Twitter or Metamask condition/term of use, when linking their wallet to twitter handle, does not mean they will allow a third party, like the Sandbox DAO, to collect and share publically this information especially with the clear objectives of SIP lobbying.
2: Operational management has also several challenges.
For example:
- Where this list will be stored? If the service of the “specialised researchers” is paid by the DAO it means the fundation is proprietary of the list, and therefore needs to be maintained by the DAOs operation team, which we don’t want to do, to not be exposed to regulatory scrutiny.
- Who has access to it? I would assume the entire community (as any community member can have eventually a SIP made on day) so nothing stopping the community to make “pirate” copies
- How is it maintained? GDPR said that consent must be collected but can be taken away at any point in time. It means we need the ability to delete the entry of the person in the database immediatelly. However given that the list will be made public, how to guaranty they are not copy of the list stashed somewhere on every community members computer? Will they think about deleting the entry too? We simply cannot.
3: And finally, from the perspective of the LAND owner: Everytime a new SIP is live, the LAND Owner is going to be contacted by the entire community trying to looby for his vote. Some people are going to try to convince him to say YES, other NO, other ABSTAIN. Multiply this by the number of SIPs and community members. Le life of the LAND owner is going to be terrible.
I hope it clarifies!
I wish you all a great weekend