This is great?!?! Maybe? I like this!
An idea stemming from the situation, where we turn tragedies into opportunities.
I believe that if the Council gives a positive evaluation to a SIP, they should automatically abstain from voting on that SIP. This way, the quorum would be automatically secured whenever the Council gives a positive evaluation.
The value of SAND reflects the investment made in the token, which is directly influenced by The Sandbox’s efforts to increase its worth. The Sandbox team can do whatever they want with the SAND they own.
This way, the Council ensures quorum for everything it deems positive, while still leaving room for the community to approve or not, a SIP even without the TSB’s vote. This could potentially provide a strategic advantage for the community, ensuring quorum when there is a positive evaluation from the TSB staff.
Following this logic and consistency, this is why the TSB also abstained from voting on @markbagogames SIP-12?? We just need to confirm if this was indeed the official directive and if this approach will continue moving forward.
I am not shocked by the fact that sandbox votes “abstain”, this allows us to reach the quorum without influencing the vote.
Concerning yuga and other things, I didn’t understand what was being highlighted.
I start to be seriously concerned about the way TSB is engaging with the community… It was very clear from more than a week now that the quorum would not be reached. When it was mentioned by some person of the community that quorum was difficult to get the answer from TSB was always that this to make sure the voting is protected… bla-bla-bla… and that the DAO was working to find mechanism to get easier quorum. Good idea to try to find a mechanism but why would you vote like that at the last minute whithout pre-informing the community about your plans?
After the shitty AMA now we have this…
Guys can you connect your neurons?
If the votes don’t pass because of the quorum, it’s a shame all the same. Well I admit that it suited me on the “NFT collection” SIP.
We also need to move forward, let’s see how things evolve.
sorry @Geraldine to bore you, where are the SIP 11 & 12 to vote ?
I can’t find nowhere, no link.
It’s not the first time i struggle to find the way to vote. It’s not really intuitive, i’m sure i’m not the only one to have this issue but i feel so stupid.
thank you very much Geraldine,
if we could have a tab dedicated to active sips that would be good, I really searched everywhere without finding anything, I remembered my favorites and I was able to find the snapshot link but it’s not ergonomic at all .
just a suggestion, thanks again for your response.
you can also delete this out-topic message, no drama, i garanted
Given the countless people who have told me that they were not voting No in order to prevent the 5 people/partners of TSB who hold 10 Mil VP from being able to sway the vote to Yes by trying to keep it under quorum, them lying to us and voting anything after promising they wouldn’t did in fact influence the vote. When the whales have the power to control everything, sometimes not voting and forcing a “failed to meet quorum” result is the best option the community has. Many even tried to convince me not to vote No for the same reason but I wanted my vote on record publicly for all to see. So yes, unfortunately, it did influence the vote.
The Special Council (by their own definition) is there to ensure the SIPs align with the Community’s Interests. Not a single one of them is from the community, nor do they even interact with the community outside of Seb who does it through his conflict of interest position as COO of TSB. So how are we supposed to trust the Special Council’s recommendations as being something that aligns with the Community’s Interests?
And how are we supposed to trust anything they say at all when they have already blatantly lied to us multiple times over the past few months in previous AMAs?
All I know is that there is a reason we are seeing some big names who have all publicly quit TSB in the past few months (and a few others who haven’t done it publicly yet). And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that they are all quitting because of things the DAO has been doing
But yes, Seb did admit that he lied to us when he said he wouldn’t use the TSB vote to sway/influence the outcome of votes and that this will be a temporary measure going forward: “This is a temporary measure until Delegation is implemented as the top priority”
Sadly not the first time we were blatantly lied to in an AMA from the DAO. Still waiting for the proof of all those people who think anyone who invested in and supported The Sandbox by staking shouldn’t receive any VP at all, as they claimed was the case in another AMA…
You should know by now not to expect a response from them here. They are not active here or on Discord. They rarely, if ever, interact with the community. We do get an AMA near the very end of voting for most SIPs (curious why they would wait to the very end though ). But if you want an answer, you will need to go to Seb on twitter since he’s about the only one of the 5 that actually interacts with the community, even though he does so through his conflict of interest role as COO of TSB and not as the head of the DAO who is there to ensure the SIPs align with the Community’s Interests (as they themselves claim).
But we all know why they did. They needed it to pass since the program was already in place and people were already hired for the new program. Since their partners who are whales were possibly going to lose because of the number of people who truly abstained from voting completely to prevent it from reaching quorum and therefore failing that way, they were forced to vote. Even though they previously promised they wouldn’t. But at least they changed it to 33%/33%/33% so it didn’t look as bad
I don’t see it as a “fool me” scenario. I believe in the end result of the DAO. Walking away is always an option for me, and (I think) most of SandFam.
SIP Batch 5: Voting
