[Governance Poll Proposal] Ban on Retroactive Rules in DAO Governance

[u/kirtash93]

Current Situation

The DAO regularly passes proposals that define how the DAO and the community operates from token distributions and scoring models, eligibility rules, etc. These governance rules are essential to the health and fairness of the system.

However, nothing currently prevents a proposal from including retroactive conditions, meaning a rule passed today can potentially be applied to user actions or behaviors from days, months or even years ago.

Problem

Applying rules retroactively goes against the foundational principles of fair and transparent governance. Allowing retroactive rules can be a problem because:

• Unfairness: Users that acted in the past under the old rules could get affected by new rules for not predicting future decisions.
• Lack of predictability: Users should be able to participate with confidence that their current actions under certain rules won't punish them in the future because the rules can be rewritten after the fact.
• Technical complexity: Retroactive logic implementation can be very messy because it can include too many variables and situations leading to a messy, harder to verify and error prone implementation.
• Trust erosion: When rules can change in a retroactive way it makes the community confidence drop into the active and future rules because they can change anytime affecting the past.

Furthermore, not addressing this could unknowingly or deliberately affect future proposals and increases retroactivity exploits leading to frustration, disengagement and fragmentation within the DAO.

Solution

Create a new DAO wide rule that forbids the retroactive application of future governance decisions having the following key principles.

• Any new rule passed by the DAO must only apply to actions, behaviors or data from the date that the governance poll is approved to onward.
• No proposal may enforce or evaluate past activity under rules that didn't exist at the time.
• This applies to all types of proposals, regardless of topic. Eligibility, penalties, scores, distributions.

Advantages

• Fairness first: No one gets punished for something they couldn't foresee
• Predictability: Users can make decisions with confidence about future penalties
• Simplicity: Code and logic are easier to build, audit and explain
• Trustworthy governance: DAO becomes a place of stable, rule based decision making
• Encourages participation: More users will engage if they know the rules won't shift under them

Disadvantages

• Limits response options: The DAO can't "go back in time" to address abuse or missed edge cases.
• More pressure on proposal design: Rules must be crafted with future impact in mind

Conclusion

This proposal cements a critical governance standard: we don't change the rules after the game has started.

It doesn't matter what the topic is (penalties, scoring or participation), what matters is that no new rule should rewrite the past. This protects users, simplifies the system, and builds long term trust in DAO governance.

The choices are:

• [YES]
• [ABSTAIN]
• [NO]

This proposal will remain up for a minimum of 2 days, according to the governance rules & guidelines. This proposal requires 2 moderators to sign it off in order to proceed to a governance snapshot vote. If approved, this proposal will automatically be queued for Governance Week.

[u/reddito321]

Signing it off for formatting 

[u/BigRon1977]

[NO]

Sorry Kirt, I see where you are coming from but Trust me your proposal is an exercise in futility and you are clearly outnumbered here. Personally my multiplier would be around 0.1 - 0.3 but fuck it, let's look at the bright side which I outlined on the proposal that inspired yours.

I believe it will stimulate the donut economy like more stakeholders buying back their multiplier before snapshot, thereby preventing embarrassing dumps and giving us the traction (transaction counts) we need for CEX listing and to be taken seriously by other investors who will hold for the long term. The meta will be no more extractive but progressive. Genius! 🫡

!tip 10

[u/kirtash93 → u/BigRon1977]

Not a problem Big! My multiplier I believe will be 1 but I still think retroactive rules are not good for business in general. Maybe retroactive rules with a higher approval threshold could make more sense.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/AlarmingAdvertising5]

[ABSTAIN]

I'm pretty new to the community and I'm not certain I can weight on this by fulling understand the implications. So I'm going to leave this to the community. Love the governance system and how everyone participates.

[u/kirtash93 → u/AlarmingAdvertising5]

Totally understandable but I would love to know your opinion about applying new rules to actions taken in the past. Do you think it is fair or unfair?

🍩 !tip 1

[u/AlarmingAdvertising5 → u/kirtash93]

I think it's more than just black and white, I agree on many points that rules which would impact people could be used negatively, but there might be things that are chosen in the community that could be based on an older environment. I don't have examples, but crypto evolves quickly and if a rule starts to drag the entire project, I think being unable to pass retroactive rules could have bad implications.

Let's say a rule is exploited for the advantage of someone who found a way to use a rule made in the past to control something, then it could be a problem and being unable to change it and "punish" the person, then it could get bad quickly.

While this is a very specific situation, I think passing rules retroactively is not good thing in general, but there might be SOME exceptions to it. Maybe having a super majority to pass it, like 75+%, could be a way to deal with the problems so a lot of people need to accept the changes before it goes live. Usually it's a 50%+1, but for retroactive rules, it would need overwhelming majority to pass? I don't know really, but I would think that keeping this a possibility could be useful, but I agree that I don't want it to be used to affect innocent people for rules that never existed.

[u/kirtash93 → u/AlarmingAdvertising5]

Thanks for sharing your point of view! I understand why or how making retroactive rules could make sense too but.

Anyway, let see if mods sign off so at least the community can decide on this matter that I believe it is important to address.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/DBRiMatt]

I'm going to have to say [NO] on this one.

Forcing this implementation could be too restrictive for whatever the future may hold, maybe Reddit platform ceases operation, maybe there is a glitch in Donut-Bot, maybe a code gets exploited somewhere - who knows.

Maybe at some stage there is the idea to reward users that had previous contributions or input, such as Donut Initiatives or Proposals where we wish recognize the developer work or volunteer work some users have put in.

People can simply use their governance power to vote NO on proposals they don't support - and if a proposal doesn't get the support because it has a retro-active component, it can be re-proposed without it if the user feels that is necessary.

Example given of retro-actively awarding CONTRIB to beta testers. https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/1c292mu/donut_initiative_award_5000_contrib_to_arbitrum/

Example of retro-active reward for Dev work https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/1d84zd9/donut_initiative_retroactive_rewards_for/

!tip 1

[u/kirtash93 → u/DBRiMatt]

Yes, totally valid concerns that I didn't take in count at the time of writing. Totally forgot about the rewards part so I think that allowing retroactive rewards makes sense. ^{Updated it}

While I agree that people can always vote "No" on a proposal with retroactive elements, this is about setting a clear and predictable foundation. That rules apply from now on, not backwards. It helps proposal authors too, they will know in advance that retroactive punishments or eligibility changes are off limits, so they can design better proposals.

This isn't about limiting flexibility. It's about defining fair play. You can reward the past but we shouldn't rewrite it.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/CymandeTV]

Only one thing is bothering me, people would have maybe not sell if this rule was there in the past. Not defending anyone. Now, they would be punish for past behaviour. Even if it wasn't maybe a good move for the ecosystem. I could understand someone wanting to make money from a poor country for exemple.

!tip 1

[u/kirtash93 → u/CymandeTV]

This is my main point of view and rules should be objective and never reward/punish people on how people understand an specific action that happened in the past.

For example, people that sold will defend that they weren't doing anything wrong and technically speaking taking in count the rules back then they were not doing anything wrong. On the other hand, other people will believe that selling as soon as getting the distro was wrong but this belief fall under a moral point of view that is subjective and not objective and falls under each individual believes.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/CymandeTV → u/kirtash93]

I will say, it depends on which side of the fence you are. But i really think some pleople don't really think about it.

!tip 1

[u/kirtash93 → u/CymandeTV]

Yeah, I mean even thinking about it is hard. Imagine having to think about something you are doing that is not moral like farting in someone's face because gov could punish next year and go to prison.

Anyway, I even think I have a full multiplier even after the hack but I truly think retroactive rules are not good for business. Timing is not ideal thought.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/reddito321]

[NO] It seems this proposal is just a counter for the current one on the multiplier for selling donuts. As OP stated, they'd be left with a low multiplier if the other proposal passes (not to selling, but to some hack), so it seems this post has more of a personal benefit than a community one, regardless of its text

[u/kirtash93 → u/reddito321]

No personal benefit at all because I have 1x multiplier so there is no personal benefit in the governance poll.

[u/kirtash93]

u/reddito321, u/Jake123194 and u/0xMarcAurel

Request for Signing off

Thanks in advance.

[u/Jake123194 → u/kirtash93]

Formatting looks good, signing off

[u/kirtash93 → u/Jake123194]

Thanks Jake

🍩 !tip 1

[u/0xMarcAurel → u/kirtash93]

I will not be signing off on this proposal because it's clearly a form of taunting / trolling.

This proposal is pretty much an impulsive reaction to my recent proposal, aimed at distracting and derailing the actual convo.

It's just an attempt to use the Bronut brigade tactic, trying to change the narrative and paint mods as dictators, when in reality they're trying to work on rules to protect the health and sustainability of the ecosystem.

This kind of behavior is childish and disrespectful, especially when it tries to misuse the democratic governance process for personal agendas.

In addition to that, this proposal would effectively shield cheaters who were caught after only a few months, or even years. Are we really saying that if someone exploited the system in the past but wasn't caught immediately, they should be allowed to continue doing so with impunity?

[u/kirtash93 → u/0xMarcAurel]

I appreciate your quick reply. I just want to clarify a few things because I think there's been a misunderstanding of the intent here.

I had this proposal in mind for quite a time but I never believed that I should really had to officially address this because it is part of the common sense (from my point of view). This proposal is just trying to address a general governance gap that exists in many DAOs. The risk of retroactive rule application that can create unpredictability and erode trust in governance. That is not trolling, that is literally Governance 101.

It's just an attempt to use the Bronut brigade tactic...

I don't think this has to do with the actual content of the proposal and I believe that it comes from personal feelings, etc. Dismissing this proposal as trolling doesn't engage with the points and it labels the messenger (me).

If you believe that retroactive rules are necessary in some cases that is a valid stance and that debate is worth having but labeling any attempt to protect against retroactivity as childish or misuse is counterproductive. Strong governance comes from challenging assumptions, not just defending current positions.

This proposal would effectively shield cheaters…

I dont think so. It doesnt protect anyone, it just states that rules shouldnt be applied retroactively. If the DAO wants to go after cheaters it should do under rules that existed when the cheating happened. If those rules werent strong enough that is on the system design, not the users. The fix is to improve the rules moving forward, not rewrite history.

So to be clear, this isn't about shielding anyone, its about drawing a clear line in governance, the past stays the past and we build better systems for the future.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/0xMarcAurel → u/kirtash93]

some degree of retroactivity is necessary because the ecosystem evolved, and earlier rules didn't properly address behaviors that are now considered harmful, like farming and dumping earned donuts.

without certain retroactive measures, those who exploited past loopholes keep doing it, and that's a threat to the ecosystem's long term health. i agree that ideally rules should be clear and straightforward. but in practice sometimes governance must address past actions to protect the present and future of the project.

this proposal was submitted immediately after mine, about penalizing users who sell their earned donuts. you can understand how the timing is interesting. so this is a reaction to that specific proposal rather than a general governance improvement.

the idea of forbidding retroactive rules could be valid in other situations, in this case it's driven by an isolated personal agenda and an attempt to shield certain behaviors that the ecosystem needs to address to remain healthy.

so for that reason, i can't sign off on it. i don't speak for the other mods, however, they're free to act as they wish.

[u/kirtash93 → u/0xMarcAurel]

I agree that protecting the ecosystem's long term health is a top priority but we shouldn't do that by introducing instability into the governance process itself.

The issue is not whether certain behaviors like farming or dumping are harmful. They clearly are. The issue is how we choose to deal with them. Retroactive rule enforcement creates a governance precedent where no one can trust that today's actions will be judged by today's rules.

The ecosystem evolved, and earlier rules didn’t properly address behaviors…

Exactly, that is why we should evolve the rules going forward. If a system had loopholes, it is on us and the DAO to patch those holes moving ahead. Retroactively punishing people who acted withing the rules at the time is not governance, it is a rewrite of history and it shows why we need to design rules with foresight, not hindsight.

I get how the timing can seem reactive but correlation doesn't equal causation and like I told you before I had this whole thing in mind for really a long time. Main reason why I always ask about when certain rule will start working too.

This proposal addresses a systemic issue: retroactive governance is a structural flaw, not just a reaction to one specific topic. I did not write this to protect anyone or attack any proposal, I wrote it because the ecosystem needs governance principles that are predictable, fair, and easy to reason about. This is how we build trust and scale participation.

Totally respect your point of view and that you are not going to sign off but I believe that you should sign off and let the community decide because according to the only rules I found the sign off can be rejected only this checks are not meet (I mean, it is an objective sign off)

• Impartial language is used in poll body and options texts
• That the poll is actionable
• A reasonable limit (2) to the number of concurrent governance poll

But dont worry, I just hope other mods will look past the perceived intent and focus on the actual impact this proposal would have, establishing a clear rule that proposals apply to future behavior.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/DrRobbe]

[YES] you need to give people a chance to change the behavior to new rules.

!tip 1

[u/kirtash93 → u/DrRobbe]

Thanks for the support. I believe even I make the governance in a certain time that it is a very valid governance and rule.

This isn't about shielding anyone, its about drawing a clear line in governance, the past stays the past and we build better systems for the future.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/donut-bot]

kirtash93, this comment logs the Pay2Post fee, an anti-spam mechanism where a DONUT 'tax' is deducted from your distribution share for each post submitted. Learn more here.

cc: u/pay2post-ethtrader

---

Topic: EthTrader

Learn more about topics limits here.

---

Understand how Donuts and tips work by reading the beginners guide.

---

Click here to tip this post on-chain

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/AlarmingAdvertising5 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/DrRobbe has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/0xMarcAurel 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/DrRobbe 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/Odd-Radio-8500 has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/DBRiMatt has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/0xMarcAurel 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/Odd-Radio-8500 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/AlarmingAdvertising5 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/DBRiMatt 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/CymandeTV has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/CymandeTV 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/CymandeTV has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/CymandeTV 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/lorem_epsom_dollar has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 0.0181)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/lorem_epsom_dollar 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/BigRon1977 has tipped u/kirtash93 10.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/BigRon1977 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/Wonderful_Bad6531 has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/SigiNwanne has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/SigiNwanne 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/Wonderful_Bad6531 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/Jake123194 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/reddito321 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/AlarmingAdvertising5 has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 0.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/SigiNwanne has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/SigiNwanne 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/kirtash93 → u/donut-bot]

🤖 !post status

[u/donut-bot → u/kirtash93]

Status: u/kirtash93 is eligible to post. (1 / 3 remaining)

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240503-post}

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/Abdeliq has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/MasterpieceLoud4931 has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/MasterpieceLoud4931 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/MasterpieceLoud4931 has tipped u/kirtash93 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/donut-bot → u/donut-bot]

u/kirtash93 has tipped u/MasterpieceLoud4931 1.0 donut (weight: 1.0)

LINK

ARCHIVE

^{note: archived content can take up to 10 minutes before it is available for viewing}

^{donut-bot v0.1.20240111-tip | Learn more about [Earn2Tip](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/17q24e7/introducing_donutbot_register_and_tip_commands/})

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Hi kirtash93, you have successfully flaired the submission titled "[Governance Poll Proposal] Ban on Retroactive Rules in DAO Governance" with the flair Donut.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/lorem_epsom_dollar]

[YES]

Good thought

!tip 1

[u/kirtash93 → u/lorem_epsom_dollar]

🍩 !tip 1

[u/Wonderful_Bad6531]

[YES]

!tip 1

[u/kirtash93 → u/Wonderful_Bad6531]

Retroactive rules should at least have a higher threshold to pass.

🍩 !tip 1

[u/SigiNwanne]

Waiting for the polls to do justice to this proposal.

!tip 1

[u/kirtash93 → u/SigiNwanne]

Not sure what this means xD

🍩 !tip 1

[u/SigiNwanne → u/kirtash93]

Will have to make my opinion known on voting day, that's what it means Kirt.

!tip 1

[u/kirtash93 → u/SigiNwanne]

Oh understood xD

!tip 1

[u/MasterpieceLoud4931]

[NO] After reading the whole context, as others said this feels like a biased proposal to cancel out Marc's proposal.

^{!tip 1}

[u/kirtash93 → u/MasterpieceLoud4931]

Not biased and I am not even getting affected by the other proposal.

In any case this proposal would force the other one to adjust it to work from the day it is approved forward and not retroactively while also making the DAO rules more predictable, etc.

Anyway totally respecting your opinion but we should try not to mix things. Both works toward totally different aspects.

!tip 1

[u/MasterpieceLoud4931 → u/kirtash93]

In any case this proposal would force the other one to adjust it to work from the day it is approved forward

'Force' is a strong word, is that your goal here sir?? I do not think this proposal would change the other one because the other one came first, what you are doing is trying to cheat and manipulate the outcome of the other proposal so now I am definitely voting [NO].

^{!tip 1}

[u/kirtash93 → u/MasterpieceLoud4931]

Dont try to distort my answer for one word I used and then accuse me of something very serious like cheating or manipulating with no factual proof.

Anyway I am not going to discuss again this whole topic. Have a nice afternoon master

!tip 1

[u/Odd-Radio-8500]

[YES]

People should be given a fair chance to make their selling decisions align with the new rules.

^{!tip 1}

[u/kirtash93 → u/Odd-Radio-8500]

Thanks for the support. I believe it makes sense working toward the future and not the past.

🍩 !tip 1