Clarifying soft consensus

Governance
#1

Squad: DAOplomats

Background

The current IP governance stages has two formal stages.

Stage 1: Consensus Check via Snapshot

Stage 2: Proposal Vote

However, there is no formal process for community feedback on proposals before it enters consensus check/stage 1. Additionally, there is no consensus on how long a post should remain on the forum before moving to Consensus Check.

The current approach does not allow for formal feedback to be taken into consideration before proceeding to consensus check. The proposer has two options, the first is to repost a new proposal or modify a proposal before it goes to stage 1. The latter results in inconsistencies between what is stated on the forum proposal vs actual consensus check while the former decreases efficiency.

Therefore we suggest adding an RFC stage to the process where any proposal must first be posted as RFC before moving to Consensus Check

Questions:

  1. What do you think about adding an RFC stage to the formal process?

  2. How many days should a proposal be on the RFC stage before moving to Consensus check?

  3. Should the RFC post include a poll to gauge soft consensus before snapshot consensus cehck?

  4. After receiving comments, should the author modify their proposal and post it directly to snapshot or post it first on forum?