I typically don’t pull proposals for two main reasons:
- While the forums provide a good initial indicator of sentiment, discussions often gain traction only after a proposal is submitted to the chain, which triggers notifications to wallet applications.
- In the forums, each post has equal weight; there’s usually no indication of whether a user has a financial stake in the proposal, whereas the blockchain reflects this weighting.
One proposal that didn’t go to the chain was Lend Community Pool USDC on Mars. I would still like to revisit this with a smaller amount, considering the feedback from you and LC, but it will need to be reworked.
Your comments have also prompted me to review previous proposals. I’ve had a few fail, and while they felt recent, the last one was actually 18 months ago regarding protorev distributions. Validators voting yes by default is an issue, but I don’t think it’s particularly because of me posting them but an overall bias.
I generally incorporate feedback during the discussion in the forums, but there often isn’t a substantial amount of input. Part of my role is to determine what seems reasonable during the drafting stage before it even gets to the forums so that could be one reason. Unfortunately, I cannot influence the prioritization of proposal action items that depend on code changes, so if we can focus on using existing governance mechanisms rather than requiring upgrades—at least in the short term—that is far faster to go into action even if the result isn’t perfect.