0x05a1ff0a…011csent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#23,926,813·view on Etherscan
duna-admin-elections@0xdcf3...7a19
+1 to this approach.
Before investing all the time and energy in running an open election, let's first see if the community is in favor of renewing existing admins.
shared similar sentiment in the last admin election topic: https://www.nouns.camp/candidates/742?tab=activity&item=0xe1c520d61fe999ae7e40269e6312dadff54efbf9eb5ff2b11fc63b1a5ac648fd-422
> Here is the process I’d propose that is simple, fair, and fully onchain:
> - The current admin team submits a renewal proposal so the DAO can first decide whether to keep the current administrators. If the DAO wants to maintain the same admins, this allows them to decide this before putting time and energy into a full election process. If the DAO prefers to proceed with a full election, this proposal will not pass.
> - If the admin renewal proposal does not pass, it will serve as the official onchain nomination process and kickoff a timer for nominees to begin submitting their own candidates.
> - The admin renewal proposal will include a short section explaining how anyone can nominate themselves if the proposal does not pass. Anyone who wants to be considered must abstain on the proposal and publicly add a copy-pasted statement: **“I nominate myself, [name], to be considered for DUNA admin elections.”** Current admins cannot vote on proposals and are exempt from this statement requirement, but are automatically eligible to submit individual proposals should the combined renewal proposal be defeated.
> - The admin renewal proposal will link a HackMD candidate template so all nominees can follow the same structure and the DAO can review candidates easily. There will be specific sections included in the template for the nominee to add in their own pitch if desired, modifications to the proposal candidate, and a closing statement.
> - If the admin renewal proposal does not pass, all nominees should finalize and publish their candidate onchain within one week after voting concludes. The end of the voting period is the beginning of the one week submission period for nominees.
> - Nominees cannot sponsor their own proposals even if they have enough Nouns to do so. Nominees must obtain sponsorship from other Nouners on their candidate as a signal of support. This avoids a wave of self-sponsored candidates that may not have backing from the DAO.
> - One week after voting on the admin renewal proposal concludes, the one week submission window opens. Anyone with the required sponsorship can submit their admin candidate as a proposal.
> - Whichever two candidates submitted during the submission week which pass with the most ‘For’ votes become the next administrators. Alternatively, the candidates whose proposals pass first would become the next admins. I’d be interested to know what others in the DAO feel is a more appropriate selection criteria, but I think the most number of ‘For’ votes makes the most sense instead of having a race to submit and pass a proposal first.
>
> This keeps the process simple and onchain, let's the DAO have full control, and ensures anyone can then step forward, with a clear timeline and a fair nomination process that avoids nomination spam onchain. It also guarantees that candidates demonstrate real support before posting a proposal. The entire process would take around four weeks.