The Community Governance Process is not working as intended due to the absence of UNI holders’ participation.
All the temperature/consensus checks so far have had between one to three voters.
As consensus can’t be reached with soft governance yet, I propose to try to achieve it with ‘hard’ governance.
This would imply that proposing delegates (currently it’s Dharma and Gauntlet) would identify pressing matters and set up a Preliminary Voting on them to decide the solution.
By Preliminary Voting, I mean voting to establish consensus without implementing the code changes.
As we can gather from the Uniswap Community call, the Community considers the liquidity mining program matter pressing.
One of the delegates could propose to vote on:
the budget for the liquidity mining program (like the temperature check snapshot)
the pools that get included.
Then the final, binary vote would decide the actual outcome with code implementation.
The budget could be defined by either an average or a median of all the votes cast.
This way, every vote will matter - as it will push the final number to one direction or another.
- Not Sure