0xa1c0b11b…e1cdsent to0xb789eb50…10cc·#22,357,530·view on Etherscan
This exact proposal has been made before. I will veto again for the same reason.
Reason from last time:
"While the more equitable distribution of funds and the attempt at a good faith retention of a % of funds to the dao make this the least bad proposal of its kind thusfar the fact that it still results in people effectively arbing the DAO means that I can't support it. Moreover, based again on the criteria laid out in the founding documents of the dao, I will veto it as the arb nature strikes me as a "threat to the treasury".
I would likely support a proposal that offered a rage quit like mechanism if it resulted in people forfeiting their tokens AND not getting more ETH out than they put in. "
I stand by this. If a proposal was made that burns tokens during ragequit and results in a more equitable distribution of funds I would not count it as something worth vetoing by the dao's charter. I've started some work on this myself but given that it requires a bit of smart contract work can't commit to a timeline.