Community Meeting Representation (Request)

Hey Fox Community!

I hope you enjoyed the first community call (of many) :slight_smile:

Moving forward, I would like to help contribute to community interests being addressed by representing everyone (that would like me to) from the community during these calls. I will be taking questions here for people to have me ask via proxy.

I understand this may effectively help those who cannot make a meeting, or would simply not like to speak to cover certain topics. Furthermore, I am available to speak to community members about these questions via personal meeting if that is necessary to understand/present the question/topic effectively.

Please leave any questions/topics that you would like to be addressed here in as much detail as possible, and I will cover said inquiry at the next community meeting (from the date you post your question). Further, I will be compiling a finalized list the day before a given community meeting. I will post this list to be reviewed by the community (in case I miss something).

Thank you for participating in this flourishing community and I look forward to representing your inquiries at the next community meeting.



Hunt. You da man for opening this up and giving us a space to ask any open questions.

So, I have a question concerning Boardroom.

Say we narrowed down specs for two different designs of the UMA Range Token and presented them for vote on Boardroom.

Could we take this approach?

  • No
  • Yes (design A)
  • Yes (design B)

And would that then collect all Yes votes vs No votes no matter which design was selected as a yea vote?

Then move forward if yes was the consensus by majority rules (between design A & B)?

Hope this makes sense.

1 Like

That’s a great question/couple of questions. How much choice is too much at once? will people only vote on one of the options (neglecting to downvote the other?).

So here is where I think things stand: We present the idea to the boardroom, if there is obvious discontent regarding specs–Ditch it. Restart the process after getting the spec data polled (again) and move forward, hopefully, with a proposal that is deemed worthy to move to snapshot vote.

This emphasizes the process of polling and community meeting discussion. We should get a general idea of community support in those meetings/polls as data is compiled and analyzed.

Thanks for asking these important questions,


Hey community! If you still have questions or concerns that you would like addressed at the next governance call please make it known here :slight_smile:

Thank you!

The Snapshot protocol does support this functionality; I’m not certain how it would integrate with SnapSafe or Boardroom, but the technical underpinnings are there.


That’s interesting. I think we’re aiming for one final proposal on the Range Token so as not to complicate the voting process. But I could imagine where this function might be useful for future proposals. :+1: