Hi all,
I would like to give you a short update explaining the reasoning for the voting of DFINITY on two recent motion proposals:
Proposal “Testing NNS proposal online form | Motion (nnsproposal.icp.xyz)”
- This proposal is a functional test for a new dapp which facilitates the submission of proposals for users who are seeking an alternative to a command line interface.
- The proposal is not a proposed change to the NNS. For this reason we decided to vote no.
- Regardless of the vote, we believe that the dapp itself is a good idea, opening up participation in the NNS to further users.
- We note that under next steps, the author indicates “After a successful test of a governance motion proposal, I’ll make another proposal to test the “register known neuron” proposal type.”. In order to save the 10 ICP rejection fee, it might be worth considering doing a real known neuron submission (and beforehand we could review the submission string in the forum).
Proposal “Submission by dApp Early Adopter | Motion (nnsproposal.icp.xyz)”
- Similar reasoning as above.
- This proposal is a test, but not an actual proposed change to the NNS.