Hi community,
I’m a newbie who only recently discovered the pDAO.
Is it correct that I can make a proposal to get funds to grow my dapp?
However, the initial PRV requirement (62,500) is a bit much for me atm.
Can we reduce this figure to something more affordable?
The requirement of PRV for proposal should be:
The requirement of PRV to win the proposal should be:
I agree.
This could be a huge barrier for anyone wishing to make a proposal, especially those in need of funding to develop their project.
Any special reasons for this number?
Instead of 62500, the amount may be lowered to 100 PRV, the quorum amount may be increased to 1M PRV. Finally, if voting fails, 100 PRV goes to DAO fund. I think this solution may prevent both spamming and abuse.
Another option: The team may perform a genesis voting (whose quorum also can be 1M PRV) to choose the initial DAO method among the some alternatives.
agree with @abduraman point above as we need to prevent spam.
Also, speaking about raising DAO funds, I brought up an idea (as part of the increase in fee to 0.1 PRV) to have a portion of this increased fee go into a DAO Treasury/Fund instead of just being burnt.
I believe this was received positively by the community and was being considered. I did not hear anything back on this.
Any update on this idea @maisie @Jayce_Nguyen @duc ?
Also, speaking about raising DAO funds, I brought up an idea (as part of the increase in fee to 0.1 PRV) to have a portion of this increased fee go into a DAO Treasury/Fund instead of just being burnt.
@Linnovations I think that might be a good idea for a proposal 
Instead of 62500, the amount may be lowered to 100 PRV, the quorum amount may be increased to 1M PRV. Finally, if voting fails, 100 PRV goes to DAO fund. I think this solution may prevent both spamming and abuse.
I agree with you that 62,500 PRV is a considerable number @abduraman . However, it is designed to prevent spam and abuse.
Note that it is not the cost of making a proposal. After the voting, funds will be sent back to your wallet; the only cost is the gas fee.
The team is discussing this further.
To me, it may not prevent abuse and especially spam. Some PRV rich people may spam the governance since they are angry with something and there is no penalty for that. That’s why I suggest that lowering barrier, increasing the quorum and penalty. At least, consider applying my idea of genesis voting to choose the initial voting parameters 
Here is my analysis:
Low barrier: for participatory democracy
High Quorum: to prevent abuse especially coming from the coordinated rich people
Penalty: to kill spam
does holding PRV in validators count for voting and or proposing?
There are 2 significant numbers here:
@abduraman @Linnovations I edited the post. What are reasonable numbers in your opinion?
If we and others choose the same amount, I think that all of us might have enough power to make a proposal to make a change.
The first proposal certainly is about lowering the requirement.
I don’t think the “Numbers” are issue here.
I feel we should be more concerned about what measures will be put in place to ensure a DAO voting system is equal and fair to all users of Incognito irrespective of the amount of PRV they hold.
I’d like to see both small and large holders (whales) of PRV placed on an equal footing when it comes to:
A) Submitting proposals
B) Being able to win proposals
I am not a expert on voting systems, but I certainly hope there a folks on the Incognito Core Team that are talking about DAO voting system with other decentralised projects who are specialists in this area.
There is no point having only BIG whales able to submit proposals and then BIG whales being able to put up the 500K PRV to win deals.
Once the small PRV holders witness BIG whales always proposing and always winning, they just won’t bother participating in DAO vote. Then we will see centralisation via BIG whales take place.
QUESTION:
Can the Incognito team please share how they plan to address the “BIG Whale” domination issue when it come to DAO proposals and voting?
IDEAS:
Hey @Jayce_Nguyen @maisie @duc @2411,
May I suggest you host a Zoom call and share your ideas for a DAO voting system and the rules etc. and let’s have a group discussion.
Alternatively, another way to gather feedback would be to hold 1:1 calls with members in the community, compile their ideas & feedback then hold a community call to share. Then we can have a productive discussion.
My input, is that the Incognito team want the higher values because it will help their own power in the new pDAO. Of course all the founders and employees will have 62,500 PRV which will ensure they can propose whatever they want. This is all just thinly veiled tyranny masked as democracy. Not surprised at all the way things have been going.
That seems a bit harsh. We have been listening to the communities feedback and also discussing internally ways to make the pDAO accessible to the masses while preventing spam and/or a DAO takeover by whale holders.
I had even suggested lowering the bar to making a proposal with the condition that if it 1) didn’t receive majority vote (not voted into approval) and 2) received under X amount of yes votes that the cost to list the proposal is burned and not returned to the user who created the proposal.
Listening to the community doesn’t get us anywhere. Actions speak louder than words. It should not cost more than the amount required to run a validator. Cap the proposal amount at 1750 PRV. Cap the amount required to vote at 100 PRV. Increase the consensus to something the whales cannot buy. Consult with other DAOs that have come before.
This will only work if the amount is sufficiently low. I would risk 100 PRV at today’s prices.
Or if the idea is a really good idea in which case it will get approved.
If I am afraid of losing my coin my really good idea will never get submitted.