I am really really critical of teams out there either pretending that governance did not exist before Bitcoin or willfully and thus maliciously ignoring the huge body of knowledge that already exists about governance.
I am not an expert in governance, most of us aren’t. There are individuals in the wider crypto community who are and can advise. Why are they not being reached out to? That is actual ecosystem development - stretching out a hand to others in the same boat.
AE, from the very beginning of the clandestine launch, appears to be an ego-driven project. 1st impressions matter when attracting developers, users, miners etc pp - even if you have the best UX in the world. “Best blockchain in the world” , “historic vote”, “on-chain governance vote”.
If best practices in governance had been observed from before Genesis then a) we would not be in this predicament b) all the hyperbole in Aeternity’s PR would be unnecessary .
AS others have proposed: I am in favor of a proposal system for the governance process, something which, to my knowledge, is neither in existence nor in the works, that is two-staged and OFF-CHAIN.
Votes should be on-chain but coming to an agreement what is to be voted on should, at this tage of AE development, happen off-chain. Agree ?