Hello Threshodlers!
I am creating this request for comments regarding our rules committee following a discussion with different community members favouring the reinstatement of this committee.
In the past, the Rules Committee played a pivotal role in ensuring that our DAO operated smoothly and fairly. Their contributions to the DAO rules, to clarify the workflows of different DAO workstreams and governance processes were key to our well operations. However, the committee was dissolved and I believe that we should consider bringing it back to operation.
With all this motivations in mind, we should also discuss how to go about filling the positions. In the past, there were three positions, each representing a different guild within the DAO, where the founding members of this committee volunteered to join it. To move forward with this, I would like to request your inputs on the following:
- Nomination Process: How should we select candidates for the committee positions? Should it be a volunteer-based nomination process, or should we consider alternative methods to ensure fair representation?
- Term Limits: Should there be term limits for committee members to ensure a fresh perspective periodically, or should we allow for longer-term commitments?
- Committee Size: Should we maintain the previous structure with three positions, or should we consider expanding the size of the committee based on our current needs? Maybe a wider group of contributors need to be represented here.
- Committee Responsibilities: What specific responsibilities and powers should the Rules Committee have? What areas of governance should fall under their purview?
Please share your thoughts, ideas, and suggestions on these questions. Your input are always greatly appreciated.
I am tagging, for visibility, several members of different DAO working groups: @Eastban, @Vict0r, @MrsNuBooty, @sap, @jakelynch, @EvandroSaturnino, @JohnPackel, @derek, @Will.