Why is the ICRC_1 Standard a governance proposal?

Thanks for the clarification. I have a few follow-up questions:

Would it be accurate to say that NNS governance proposals are polls that gauge the sentiment of the staked voting power in the NNS? I use the word “poll” because any entity can choose to act (or not act) based on the results of a poll.

As this was sent by DFINITY to the NNS, I might argue there’s a big difference between the sentiment of the developer community, vs. its voting power distribution on the NNS.

NNS_Voting_Power != Dev_Community

If you guys want more feedback, just hold a poll like @mariop already did on the forums Voting results for the ICRC-1 Fungible Token Standard and next steps. Maybe blast it on Twitter too?

Also, this standard has (for all intensive purposes) already been decided. Would the working group actually have changed things or stopped the standard’s release if the proposal were to be rejected?

I understand if the purpose proposal was made as a “blast email announcement”, I just don’t understand why the NNS was chosen if the purpose was to gauge developer sentiment.

3 Likes