This is brilliant. After reading this post, I’m convinced this is best practice and the most democratic way forward.
This looks good to me. It is helpful for ICDevs’ narrative as we seek out followers. It lets voters keep their agency while also backing ICDevs as an entity.
If the motion proposal passes, who will actually implement the change in code?
My current understanding is that community members still cannot make code changes to the IC repo, build a new replica binary, and submit “Bless Replica Version” NNS proposals for that binary.
Does that mean DFINITY will have to implement this? Have they agreed to do it?
(Apologies for all of the “plumbing” questions, but I think they’re important.)
The intent is for Dfinity to make the code changes. If needed, I would offer to submit the formal proposal with code changes attached, but it would also be fine for Dfinity to do it. DF has been engaged in this discussion over the last 4 weeks and the proposal has been shaped by a lot of their ideas and concerns. It seems likely that DF will be in support, especially if it passes. So far, the responses have been favorable, but there has not been a formal verification of support. I also don’t expect a formal position statement from DF, especially if their preference is for the community to decide.
No objection from me, it sounds like a good idea to increase individual participation while not putting rewards at risk.
This proposal will be submitted to the NNS on Monday of next week.
This proposal has passed. Thank you for voting on this proposal!
How and when will we learn more about how proposal 38985 (regarding manual voting) will be integrated into the tokenomics roadmap?
thanks for following up!
As a next step, we estimate how much effort this change would be so it can then be prioritised compared to all other projects on the roadmap.
Since many important projects are planned for Q1 already, it is likely that the requested change will happen earliest in Q2 of 2022.