xGov proposals submission is currently paused so that we can update the xGov Registry.
We will set the voting phase to two weeks for all sizes to allow more time for xGovs to self-organise and vote.
We will also adjust the xGov quorum parameters slightly to avoid penalizing larger proposals during this initial phase, where absenteeism has become a challenge. These will be changed from 30 for small, 50 for medium, and 70 for large to 40 for medium and 50 for large. The parameter for small remains unchanged.
To make these adjustments, all current proposals must first be finalized and paid out, or removed from discussion. A user reported an error while trying to remove their proposal, as they had decided to improve their work before requesting funding. @krby.algo is currently working to resolve this issue.
The council multisig was successfully tested this week and will soon be deployed to mainnet. Once that is set up, the council will confirm TC compliance of approved proposals, allowing proposals to be funded.
In parallel, @cusma is working on an update to unlock asynchronous reconfiguration of the xGov Registry, which means that we will be able to make these updates in the future, without pausing proposal submissions and without having to clear the proposal queue before implementing new changes.
We are targeting this release for next week, and I’ll post updates to this thread once proposal submissions are open.
I’m using this thread to ask a question. If you recall Adri, I mentioned this in Discord, but I didn’t actually ask anything.
My proposal on behalf of ASA Stats was the very first submitted to the new platform, and it was also the first for which the xGovernors voted. It didn’t pass by a margin - 7 votes were missing to reach the xGov Quorum of 50%. As one ecosystem’s member pointed out, it was “a victim of being first”.
I want to ask, would my, or any other resubmission of the same proposal that was rejected, get a negative reaction from the Council? Let me remind you that last time the proposal got 8-2-1 in the Council voting about T&C compliance.
Hi @ipaleka I can’t speak for the Council, perhaps @simonb would weigh in.
IMO, it would be ok to submit it again in this case, as you were indeed a victim of being first. We are adjusting the parameters, and with the new 2-week voting phase for all proposals (and adjusted quorum), I hope you’ll have a positive result.
Btw, I forgot to say one important part, I’m not planning to just resubmit, the plan is to take into account comments from:
ArbBot - smart contract will be recreated using puyapy v5.4.0, unit testing suite using algorand-python-testing v1.1.0 will be added, as well as a new integration test suite using algokit_utils).
aper_nft - suggested topics will be emphasized in the proposal description
Hey, I personally don’t see any issue with rejected proposals (due to participation quorum) resubmitting(even if exactly the same) - even more so, as this was the first iteration with clear participation quorum kinks.
Now if your proposal had been utterly rejected by xgovs, e.g. majority negative votes etc, then it would be a different stance from my side.
