Thanks Viszla. We will also continue as an active delegate regardless of compensation and the DAO’s delegation; we hold sufficient GNO to warrant proper attention and participation in any event. However, we agree it will be a shame to lose the good delegates we have either because the program was not renewed or because compensation was not agreed.
With that said, we think it’s important that any further vote on a delegate program take place after GIP-140 is implemented, as this is likely to materially alter the landscape of voting power. We also anticipate that the existing DAO delegations will be removed before any subsequent vote takes place (elected delegates accounted for roughly half of the 137 quorum). Depending on the impact of these two changes, we are also considering whether it is necessary to raise a proposal to amend the DAO’s governance rules; particularly the current quorum rule requiring for 75,000 GNO to vote “For”, which has blocked 6 proposals in the last 6 months.
We see no reason these discussions can’t continue in parallel (indeed, we’d encourage it). However, we wanted to note these related developments, because the circumstance of a second Snapshot vote seem likely to us to be quite different to those of 137. Unfortunately, these changes may also necessarily be cause for some delay; we would certainly caution against rushing towards a second proposal to renew the program before these developments.