Probably wrong direction
Kinda weird to attack single project by changing general rules...
Possible it's better to discuss proposals in more general approach as whole, not by singles, especially with change like that.
We all know that governance activity on blockchains is very low, it's relatively hard or even impossible to get proposal accepted without any politics, people completely don't care, people with stake often care less and need to be approached.
Here we already have much bigger problem with monopoly and even farming dhf, some people already know they can make proposal after proposal for anything and still will be voted, some of them might be not aware of farming they do, it's just opportunity you need to take. We need more diversification in proposals, more discussion about all the proposals, more chances for people who didn't farm dhf already for years, trying everything possible even leofinance. Even if they fail, we tried.
Overpricing proposals is another issue, we just need to agree it's happening and approach all the people creating proposals and have a discussion, like I already wrote above it's weird discussion with focus on single project when problem is general.
Very interesting way to tell someone they need hive logo :D
I need Hive logo too actually on my app, too bad no one told me, learning this way...
I tested it all.
I have 3-4 years old application, which is already very advanced, built for hive users not personal profit, 5-10x cheaper proposal than most of the other proposals, actually cost almost nothing compared to others, still didn't go through, seems like I need to beg whales to get it through. Most likely someone else with more hive friends will do weak copy of my application and do proposal for 10x more $ and it will be accepted first day.
Governance is hard.
The votes needed for a proposal to go through should be correlated to the HBD amount requested!
This would make small proposals possible. E.g. for a local community project to increase awareness, we would need e.g. just 100 HBD per year. Impossible to fund this, it would never go through as we don´t have the interest of the big boys. If the requirements were correlated to the request, things would look different.
Governance is hard! Agree.
Also agree governance activity is low at hive and it is hard to get funded unless you are within the know. That was the norm, but recently many other non-core proposals have been funded. The bar is rather low these days. I think community should change that. That is my opinion. Many share it. Many thinks this is a marketing proposal at bear market which never works.
You are onboarding people on hive, asking money from hive and don't have hive anywhere on your promotion?? Are you kidding me?? :)
I don't onboard people on hive, actually no one really does(opinion), onboarding people is some internal hive bs, try to list me examples of onboarding initiatives that worked... Every time someone mentions it I laugh, I guess am onboarding minimalist, I don't participate in it just trying to do my best to make life easier for hive users. This strategy might work even better, if people stop farming $ on onboarding and create more useful low cost application that will make hive simply better.
I made application for hive users, you basically need to know hive in first place when approaching my application, same for LeoFinance, Hive is so obvious and essential in this relation that I personally didn't even think about placing logo on my app(BeeSwap), but already on my list...
Still whole thing should be discussed in relation to all proposals, this post should list all the proposal and we should discuss it all. If we want ALL overpriced proposals to be cheaper, we should talk about it. Asking for increasing required proposal limit cause single proposal is pure ignorance.
Is it problem with The bar for proposals being low issue here, or there is a problem with LeoFinance proposal? Only this proposal is over priced or half of them are over priced? Humans have tendency to over simplification. It's not like you going to solve a problem here, you might just push it away, or will create another problem like increasing monopolization, and decreasing governance participation.
That "you" is not directed at you. It's the Royal you and directed at Leo.
I know what you do. I know you don't onboard people but the Leo proposal is about that and yes it is BS! None of the onboarding initiatives worked. My goodness we are in total agreement!
I said it, the problem is the Leofinance proposal is expensive, unnecessary and untimely and it will not deliver anything.
And yes there is other expensive proposals too. My post asks community to vote on return proposals which is about raising the bar for all proposals. Then each proposal maker will have to lobby individually to get funded.
So you understand that you attack my not even voted in cheap proposal by attacking this single proposal, trying to create rules that will make it harder to everyone to get voted with quite an ignorance towards everything wrong that is already voted.
I don’t even know if you have a proposal.
It is your job to let me know that.
If you have a proposal you are asking for money. You have to convince me. I am the consumer and I get to do whatever I want and I don’t even have to explain :)
This is the reality my friend. Warm up to it.
It's there for 150 days not that hard to find, there is only 20-30 proposals ? Somehow you found leo proposal and are against it, same way you can find mine and be for it or against it. It is quite simple, you can vote all of them if you want.
I know that I can pay you or others, or convince you many other ways, quite bad if it's all based on convincing not matter itself. I guess we all have some experience with real life governments. We know systems like that have tendency towards corruption.
We can assume more people who could decide wait for some "convincing" one way or another, maybe it's already long term relation like: "You convince me, I convince You" and everything else matter less, and this way reached these ignorance levels.
Once again, am just pointing out that it is completely wrong to discuss governance topic like that cause single project, there is much more happening, it's bit more complicated, there is much more to fix, ignorance might be one of the first thing to work on if you want improve hive governance.
This is a less than ideal result of having the ability to vote on as many proposals as you want. I think the ability to express negation on proposals themselves would be better.
As for setting the bar:
There are 168 Million Hive staked as HP. Of this, only ~24 million vote for the return proposal representing about 14%.
14% is not a sufficiently high enough bar. Especially when the other 86% have to share the outcome.
how much of staked HP participate in proposals governance? all ?
Enough that HBDstabilizer which is at the top, has 43M HP on it. In-fact, when the previous hbdstabilizer proposal was running, it became the effective return proposal, and it too, had around the same bar.
Seems like in your opinion it's too easy to be funded and there is more proposals to deny.
Which proposals should not be funded in your opinion? Where we should move The bar?
It’s a sliding scale. It will be net effect when a lot more common people will vote for return proposal. Now hardly anyone knows it exist.
My opinion will be different from yours. If you want to sway my opinion and if you have a proposal you want funding you need to lobby for it and convince me or other individuals.
Can't answer the question? You want to move The bar here! not me Where it should be moved? Which projects should be declined ? Is it only LeoFinance proposal you are against and you took completely wrong approach and can't answer simple question about topic you started.
There is something wrong with approach, mentioned it in first comment. Communication is important, I don't think we need to vote return proposal and change it for all proposals cause this proposal is over priced or wrong, we should talk about it, and show creators better way, point mistakes, it's not a problem to add hive logo to webpage...
I already know that lobbying is more important than proposal, I knew this before making proposal, it's still very cool experiment and proof for people who were trying to convince me it works properly. Like I already said, someone will make weak copy of my application and take 10x more $ from fund, and people will not realize as awareness is super low, people don't even know how this return thing works, some people still locked in proxy after justin sun event.
If there is something else I can do to improve my application just tell me. Don't tell my governance lobbying is more important than my application, cause that's a proof of broken system.
Return proposal was much higher before, so I guess someone stopped voting it, maybe it was to push some crap proposals over The bar or maybe someone realized it stops any development as governance activity is super low. Can't fight with low activity in governance by increasing required limits...
Sure can. Watch me :)