List of Proposals Open For Voting (Including Not Yet Whitelisted Proposals)

Summary
This is intended to be a list of legitimate proposals that up for vote in the voting section. Currently that section is only showing whitelisted proposals (see ticket and ticket)

This is intended to be a place to list legitimate proposals until they are whitelisted, so they can be voted upon.

If your proposal is not whitelisted, but is a legitimate proposal, then please comment and list the proposal number and link (ie. https://station.terra.money/proposal/[proposal number], and I will attempt to get it put into the description as soon as possible.

Motivation
To list legitimate proposals that are not yet whitelisted.

Legitimate Proposals List
Whitelisted Proposals open for vote can be found here:

Legitimate Proposals that are not yet whitelisted can be found here:

I must bookmark this thread. Thank you

Also my proposal is not yet on there. I am working on it.

My plan is currently on here and once posted there I will update you

1 Like

List of Non-Whitelisted Proposals

Note: Given the changing nature of circumstances, the proposals with the higher numbers are more likely to be updated with more current information in mind - however, there are proposals in the whole range from 1200 - 1700’s that are relevant to the current circumstances. Proposals in the 1200 and some in the 1300 range only have today to 2 days voting left. Not all of the proposals may meet fiduciary responsibility (although I noted it on a few that may not meet fiduciary responsibility, there may be others). This list does not include the whitelisted proposals 1273, 1299, 1623, or 1747

1 Like

I want to add to this topic, and soon create a separate topic for discussion.

@aeuser999 @alagiz

Long outstanding requirements for submission of proposals on Terra Station was to format as follows:

Title
Summary
Link back to Governance and Proposal Categories on now: classic-agora.terra.money

Recent proposals are not following this method, and should be rejected. A Terra Station Admin should reject proposals that do not allow public discussion on the official site.

If we need to pass a proposal to solidify these guidelines, then let’s do it. We can later, update the UI to include a hint/filter for a link requirement.

Additionally, many proposals are being submitted more than once every few days. These proposals should also be rejected and flagged as SPAM. You can see many of these pending in the deposit, another was related to a burn at the CEX/DEX.

It is very important we remedy these issue now, and not after bogus proposals pass.

Thank you!

Hi @BendersBigScore ,

I can agree that having it check for a link (with the hopes that the link is to a discussion somewhere) is preferable. I would not be supportive of it checking for a link to the discussion site however, since in that case the discussion site no longer being available would be problematic for governance and work against decentralization. However, given the struggle that happened around “whitelisting” (as this very discussion you posted in mentioned - all these were not whitelisted, and seen as spam, even though they were legitimate proposals), brings me to the point that if a person would like to pay to put in the proposal, without discussion, that really that is their right. It is also the right, and every LUNA v1 owner who has their coins staked, has the responsibility to research and vote accordingly.

For myself, if the proposal is not clearly stated then for me it is a no-go. If it is clearly stated but the implications are not so clearly understood by the general population and/or are not completely reasonable, then without a discussion, that proposal for me is also a no-go (even if it sounds good - without a discussion, I would not be able to tell what the implications may be, or what is being meant, and a developer would have nothing to go on but the stated proposal for understanding nuances - and I would rather those nuances be flushed out in discussion rather than some developer making that call). That is how I would vote personally (and would encourage other to do the same), mainly since the documentation itself states, as you point out, that discussions should precede a proposal (" Before uploading any proposal, try to get community feedback on the Terra Agora research forum". But, I will not support efforts to hide proposals that are legitimate (ie. they have paid the full deposit). Even the documentation states “To prevent unnecessary proposals or abuse of the system, all governance proposals must obtain [the] minimum deposit…” (and that they lose that deposit if the proposal does not pass). This is the “spam filter” and it is currently already in place (anything beyond this has the potential to be used to block legitimate proposals).

One persons proposal is another persons spam (and vice versa). I do understand though the intent to weed out proposals with links that could be malicious, but the cost of preventing governance is something we have to live with, and be vigilant in research and voting, (and hope people are cautious with links and vote responsibly - even if those votes are different than what I may believe are the best for the long term health of Terra v1).

I hope you have an awesome day today :slight_smile:

Note: That last paragraph in my above comment should have read:

One person’s proposal is another person’s spam (and vice versa). I do understand though the intent to weed out proposals with links that could be malicious, but the cost of doing this will prevent governance, and therefore “spam” feeling proposals that have met the deposit is something we may have to live with, and be vigilant in research and voting, (and hope people are cautious with links and vote responsibly - even if those votes are different than what I may believe are the best for the long term health of Terra v1).

Submitting multiple proposals in a short time time period with the same exact content is SPAM, and should be rejected. Period. Why not just keep submitting proposals until I’ll get the outcome desired? Not putting an official link to the community forum attempts to hide discussions. Even the official tutorial alludes to this fact:

“Proposals start as ideas within the community on Terra’s Agora forum. After gaining support and feedback from the community, a proposer drafts and submits a proposal alongside an initial deposit.”

Note: The above proposals in this post are excluded from this brief conversation as they were submitted under a precarious situation where the community was being road-blocked on purpose.

I guess I will have to take the democratic route, and present this as a proposal. Hopefully, the community will want to preserve and enforce some structure; otherwise, we will all face chaos on this reboot.

Actually submitting proposals, making a motions, or submitting a bill in legislative bodies normally allows no limit for how many times it may happen. While it can have frustrating implications, it has also been used to enact legislation that has been highly beneficial (here I am thinking of William Wilberforce and those who he worked along side introducing legislation multiple times for either the abolition of the slave trade or of slavery altogether). I will say though that unless the proposer changes something of their approach, if they continue to fail at reintroducing proposals, all they will do by putting in multiple proposals is to provide LUNA to the community pool.

I agree though, if you were inclined, your suggestions could be presented as a proposal for the Terra v1 governance community to decide based upon the merits of the suggestions.

I hope you have a great day today :slight_smile:

Should be “… if they continue to fail at reintroducing proposals, all they will do by putting in multiple proposals is burn the LUNA they deposited.”