Candidates for the election Btcz Managers (passed)

Proposals
#1

Dear ladies and gentlemen of the BitcoinZ Community. Candidates for the election Managers for our five Community Subwallets:

1.Social Media
2.Bounties
3.Adoption
4.Charity
5.Community Rewards

These subwallets will have a small budget of 800k btcz each. The candidates will be elected for 3 months.

The rules to apply are given here:

  1. Member enrolled from minimum one year on the forum of btcz
  2. Who created at least 3 topics and had the approval of the community
  3. Who dynamically helped the project or donated to the project (work, or donation in btcz)
  4. The candidate whose job was not proven favorable to the project cannot be re-elected during the next 7 months
  5. It is no longer possible to nominate those who have been branded as ineligible, stolen from the project or done something that could compromise the stability and confidence of the btcz project

Mode:
One who wants to apply for 1 of the manager jobs will have to precise answering this post:

  1. who he is and for which place he is applying for
  2. what he has done to help the project, what he plans to do and how he can help the project. Proof must be brought by attaching links or pictures that prove the activity towards the project
  3. write his telegram id or discord where the users can contact him to report a problem or a good opportunity in his job area.
  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

1 Like
#2

This set of (stricter) rules is a nice addition for the future.

I only feared that making it extremely hard by asking for reports and too many requirements we could end having 1-2 candidates for all the wallets (while we are looking for at least 10 in order to have 2 candidates for each one ).
Just think that with the current approach we had very low participation and we ended up with the “vote for an approval” scenario because of this.

At least in this early stage.
I like this proposal , however I don’t know if we will have grown enough in order to see a nice balance between the reqs and the desired participation in the very next elections.

So I vote Yes but I have a serious concern about the described side-effect. We could easily end up with only 2-3 people available/willing/with fulfilled requirements for all the 5 manager positions.

Some will then say that this is not quite democratic, it is too centralised etc

(In the case that noone else is available the same member can have a second Subwallet if he is the only candidate).

Already a few people wondered why we don’t have a variety of candidates to choose from.
So by making the frame of rules even stricter will only worsen this.
(Of course if we have a much bigger Community this set would be ideal)

(In the case that noone else is available the same member can have a second Subwallet if he is the only candidate).

3 Likes
#3

The rules are to ensure the safety of the project. Even if we have a few candidates or only one, it is not centralized if we give the possibility to run for office. the rules don’t seem so rigid: year of registration or never stolen. This is the beginning, in the future we will implement.

1 Like
#4

Very like to see this activity from all members, and a beautifull addition to existing upgradements.
Good call Solid, I only suggesting that if the vote will pass to delay the result later when the community grown enough and th group of participants also grown enough to be restrictened.
Up to you, voted yes.

1 Like
#5