-Reach a compromise between various proposals and community sentiment re: Ethereum Crosschain TC Community Assets and a controlling body.
-Address community concerns in these debates
-Assure community representation in any governing body elected or appointed
Since it seems everyone is coming around to the idea of a governing body of trusted professionals who are capable of making decisions pertaining to the development of the Terra Classic chain, I thought I would put my ideas in writing and add them to the mix.
This idea was originated by Alex Forshaw with his agora proposal on 28th of October. The idea was met with various objections and concerns regarding a self appointed governing body. The ideas I will, express here are meant to alleviate some of those concerns, while still preserving the logic of an oversight committee.
My recommendation would be that we elect (8) people to this panel. Not (6). Not (9). Reasons for the specific number will become apparent later.
I further suggest that we select a date by which potential candidates for this committee can I submit their candidacy on TerraStation for a vote. Each text proposal submitted by a potential candidate, should contain all pertinent information that they wish to relay to the community regarding why they should serve. As there is a fee for submitting a proposal on TerraStation, random agitates would be dissuaded from mucking up the process with farcical proposals.
Voting would proceed as normal, and a candidate would only need to reach quorum to progress to the final vote, which would be held on the following week. This should severely narrow the field. In the unlikely event there are not eight candidates who reach quorum, the candidates who came closest to reaching it would complete the (8) and we would have our committee members. Should we have more than eight candidates reach quorum those candidates would go on to the final election, which would be a top eight total votes scenario.
We can attempt to reach a consensus on how long a term committee members would serve before they needed to be elected again, but I would suggest we did this yearly. I believe it would also be prudent to install a function which allows for a majority vote of the committee to call for an emergency election regarding a bad actor/disruptive force scenario or a situation where someone is unable to fulfill their term.
TC Community Ethereum Crosschain Assets
It has been suggested that this money, approximately $4.16 million worth, should be converted to LUNC and kept in the community pool. I believe we should consider the still volatile nature of LUNC, and look to a more stable asset. This is not to suggest a lack of confidence in Terra Classic but an acknowledgment of the current reality. As far as where these assets are stored, I suppose that is up for debate, but I would suggest we consider a specific wallet designated for these funds. Allocation of assets, to or from this wallet would need to be governed by a smart contract, which is activated by a majority 5 out of 8 vote. It could be a security risk for any member, or former member of the committee to have access to the keys. Hopefully smarter people than I could figure out the way to do this.
The committee should not have unlimited power to utilize these funds solely on their vote. I would suggest that we set a dollar amount, possibly somewhere between $100,000 and $200,000 which would be a cap for what can be voted on by the committee. Anything above whatever dollar amount the community decides on would have to be presented to the community via an Over Budget Proposal (OBP). I’m sure this number would be hotly debated assuming any of this seems a logical path. Just bear in mind that the lower that number the slower the process as we would be getting more and more proposals to be voted on before moves could be made to grow the network thereby negating the purpose of the committee in the first place.
Over Budget Proposals
Proposals submitted to the community for approval above the agreed upon $ amount would be voted on by the community as well as the committee. As it seems logical that the elected committee would have a greater knowledge and awareness of the inner workings of the chain and development progress I would recommend they hold 5% voting power each. With (8) committee members this totals 40% of the vote leaving 60% of the vote still in community control. This specific ratio is why I chose eight committee members as opposed to nine. And really, why was nine ever the correct number?
A Final Thought
As someone who is always concerned that the non technical and non finance engineer community is left out of the narrative I would strongly suggest a community liaison be part of this committee (in addition to the 8) . Although I have not discussed the subject of compensation for the committee here, as I believe that is an entirely separate subject and possibly putting the cart before the horse, I would think that this community liaison position would also be compensated although voting ability should be the same as any other community member, i.e. one vote. Think of this position as the conscience of the group. A person to keep the group grounded in a community first outlook and who holds no allegiance to any particular faction or perspective (unbiased).
The idea is to maximize the decentralization of Terra Luna Classic by including, as much as possible, the community in the selection of who leads it and in what capacity. I humbly submit these ideas for your consideration and welcome your constructive criticism.
Thanks for taking the time to read.