It should be pointed out that the D-QUORUM neuron is not actually controlled by the NNS…it is controlled by the Followees assigned to the Neuron Management proposal topic. There is no code that performs the intended functions that Alex would like to implement for NNS control. In fact, this functionality is intentionally forbidden in the code. There are numerous forum threads that discuss the features he would like to implement and in all cases DFINITY has recommended that he create this functionality in a separate canister.
The reason that the NNS is currently assigned as a controller of the D-QUORUM neuron is because when you spawn a neuron from neuron maturity using command line, you can assign a controller. Alex created this neuron and assigned the NNS governance canister as the controller. Before taking this action, he assigned himself as a Followee for the Neuron Management proposal topic for the parent neuron so the child neuron would inherit the same Followees. He was then able to set other people as Followees for this topic too. Controlling a neuron using the Neuron Management proposal topic is a feature that is built into every NNS neuron, but very few people know about it because it is only accessible via command line. These Neuron Management Followees can control all aspects of the neuron except dispersing ICP. That means they have the ability to set Followees for every topic, trigger a manual vote on every proposal, set hotkeys, change dissolve delay and state, etc. So the truth is that these Followees control the D-QUORUM neuron in the same ways that are built into every NNS neuron, yet the NNS is listed as a controller in name only because there is intentionally no functionality that enables the NNS to actually control a neuron in this way.
Creating methods that give the NNS direct control of a neuron Followees in this way would be a slippery slope that fundamentally changes NNS governance. Personally, I’m getting tired of always feeling the need to raise a red flag every time I see Alex bring up this topic. He alludes to capabilities that don’t actually exist or alludes to support from DFINITY on an idea where they have not actually indicated support. I would greatly appreciate if DFINITY (aka @lara or @bjoernek) would offer an assessment of Alex’s ideas in a way that gives concrete feedback on whether or not the NNS will ever be used to elect Followees for individual neurons or whether the NNS will ever change the maturity distribution mechanism where it is no longer assigned to the actual controller of the neuron. Alex uses language that makes it sound like his ideas are a forgone conclusion based on his read of DFINITY feedback so far. If he is right, then I’d like to know so I can adjust my responses accordingly. If he is wrong, then I would appreciate if you would tell him in no uncertain terms.
For more information about the ideas Alex has raised regarding D-QUORUM neuron control by the NNS, you can start with these threads:
D-QUORUM Stake & Disbursals
Known Neuron Proposal: D-QUORUM