0xcb06bede…b9ccsent to0x6f3e6272…223d·#19,747,142·view on Etherscan
This. Not sure how this prop got onchain.
+1
> feels unnecessary to raise. i think the feeling is that like an additional fork might be imminent and that we should avoid it by raising the threshold?
>
> if that's the case i almost want to lower the threshold to let those arbers out. only rationale i agree with for raising fork threshold is if we think it can *deter* arbers but if we already think we have close to 30% of circulating supply with us as arbers then we'd rather not force them to stay by blocking their exit.
>
> also 51% almost nukes the point of this mechanism as a minority protection mechanism in the first place. even if we raise i wouldn't ever raise it over 51% b/c then like what's the point? the economic majority doens't need to fork b/c they have control over dao votes anyways.