I support expediting the governance process, but I have a few concerns:
- What exactly defines a Level 2 user?
- Is the primary objective of governance to encourage community-driven or prospective partner proposals? How should the community approach these proposals? Recently, most proposals have focused on supporting new markets, such as the QiDAO, SPOT, and Wrapped Super OETHb proposals. Many rely heavily on Chaos Labs’ review and recommendations, with some, like EURC and cbBTC, being prioritized and reviewed. To best serve the community, a clear framework should be established to ensure all proposals are evaluated thoroughly and consistently. We also want to avoid any perception of “governance theatrics,” so encouraging more consistent and frequent participation from community-accepted governance delegates and aspiring delegates is essential.
- Regarding reward refreshment, I suggest amending this proposal to include an auto-refresh budget. The proposed amount could be allocated to a separate Smart Contract or Multi-Sig Safe, with funds released on a time or date trigger to ensure rewards are refreshed automatically when needed. This would reduce the need for frequent, additional proposals. The only time a new reward replenishment proposal should be submitted is if the protocol decides to increase or decrease the reward rate for any reason.