Meta: Separation of Signalling and Voting

[yeqbfgxjiq]

AGPs are a wonderful tool to give the community a voice and guide Aragon's decision making. Before submitting proposals for concrete decision making, there is often a need to gather signals from the community. This can happen in the forum, but in a heated and long term debates it's often impractical to measure sentiment without getting overwhelmed. The Aragon community realizes this and has created an awesome signalling app.

I propose that the signalling app be updated so that it is fully functional and can included in the AGP-1 doc as part of Stage 2: preproposal. This would require all AGPs to use the signalling app to gather sentiment from the community along with current methods of forum posts and AMAs before drafting a proposal. This metric can then be taken into consideration by the AGP Editors during Stage 3: Draft.

Please share thoughts on this and/or what needs to happen from a technical perspective to make it possible. Once a more concrete plan is in place, a submission as a Meta AGP seems appropriate. Thanks :)

[yeqbfgxjiq]

It’s also important to think about what metrics the signalling app signals. If people ask stupid questions they’ll get stupid signals. It seems wise to include a few global metrics for all Stage 2 signalling votes:

• Is the language clear and unambiguous?
• Is there a clear conflict of interest between the proposal and Aragon’s values as outlined in the manifesto?
• Does this proposal add value and functionality to Aragon’s products or token?
• Etc…

Proposal writers could also add additional questions specific to their proposal if they felt so inspired.

[john-light]

This (just merged) AGP may be of interest: #75