I think it's chill to keep it, doesn't seem like candidate spam is an issue
sent from voter.wtf
0.1E seems like too much friction to create candidates. We can always adjust if needed.
0.1 feels too much for a somebody seeking support on their early project
unnecessary for now
not warranted right now imo. candidate spam is not a problem and we are trying to attract more proposals
FOR - 33 VOTES
benbodhi | "worth experimenting with differing amounts and monitoring activity to learn what price makes the most sense. Too low and it allows for a lot more props and potentially low effort spam (not saying anything is as of yet, just potential)... but set it too high and you exclude the potential for newcomers to the DAO with wild ideas and no friends in the nouniverse, additionally, limited ETH to spend on sharing an idea for potential funding. There must be a happy medium somewhere, and it could also lead to differing quality of props along with quantity. Let's experiment."
AGAINST - 4 VOTES
ABSTAINS - 2 VOTES
We have more spam proposals than spam candidates, and those cost the DAO real money in gas. Let’s update this if things break, not preemptively.
sent from voter.wtf
i don't think that this is currently needed. lets adjust once we have a substantial increase in candidate proposals.
while it does not seem to be an issue yet wrt spam - i do think upping the stake makes the candidate pipeline more manageable (would rather see 10 over 100s at any one point in time). too many (presumably lower quality) props breeds apathy.
.01 is much too low to deter spam and marginal Candidates, .1 might be too low too, we'll see
(noun 40 voting via agora)
I'm not sure if we need this change. we had ~10 candidate props so far and I just went through them all and I would only characterize 1 or 2 as spam-ish. so I don't think there's a need to raise it yet and if anything maybe there's value in keeping it low to be more encouraging of submissions.
also even if we start getting spam, I don't know if raising the fee is necessarily the right option. these are "candidate" props. we should want a high volume (maybe 10x the onchain props?). the main issue right now is that we only have gov clients that just list candidate props out in chronological order, but if we start having gov clients dedicated for candidate props then those clients could do much more clever things to hide the noise and present the most relevant / high signal things at the top (similar to a subreddit etc).
Hard to say what the ideal value is, but think 0.1e will serve us better than 0.01e atm
The create candidate charge was inadvertently set to 0.01E upon upgrading to V3, and this proposal is to change it to the correct fee of 0.1E.