Hi all! I’ve been thinking that perhaps a good way to go about our governance would be to create a clear schedule, where we debate specific topics for pre-defined periods of time.
So for example —placing arbitrary numbers just to illustrate — $UBI issuance could be adjusted once a year and we could have a 3 month period to work on it together. The process could start with discussions on the forum and sentiment gathering tools like pol.is, then have a few panels with vocal members of the community, economists and UBI proponents to continue deliberating, and only towards the end move to the proposal writing and voting phase.
After the voting is over, we can move to another topic, for example, registration requirements, where we all dive into sybil resistance together.
I think it makes sense for $UBI grants coming from the 4m pool to be ongoing, year round. But we could also fit them somehow in this schedule and have some process by which we can collectively elaborate on our priorities, even if the result we get at the end is not binding, and just for our own collective sense-making.
This would be somehow similar to how gitcoin grants work, where you have 4 rounds a year. Having some pre-defined structure can really help the community situate itself, and give more legitimacy to the governance overall. Just thinking out loud here, but would love to know what y’all think