how does a council vote vs. max vote change throughput?
A 12-person council has limited bandwidth and would be expected to review every proposal.
It works on majority approval with the need for at least 51% to vote - where if the council members for any reason fail to vote, the proposal fails by default.
OpenGov where any DOT holder can vote - allows for proposals to pass more often, even if certain holders are unavailable for any reason, other (potentially smaller) DOT holders can continue voting on proposals to reject/accept them.
this model opens up for a more decentralized Treasury as it splits the treasury into multiple smaller treasuries
I had missed this part, apologies.
Yes, this is inline with the idea for having several focused on-chain collectives and is probably the direction in which things are headed.
The key differences are the larger size and the hierarchical structure of a collective, which I believe is better suited to carry out these functions than a flat council that’s purely elected.
Can you please elaborate on the lack of resilience + bottlenecks?
It’s a lot easier to convince or force 12 people to collude to disrupt operations v/s a decentralized community of DOT holders.
For bottlenecks, it’s the same reason explained in the first part.
That said I do believe that having focused, merit-based collectives (instead of a council) similar to the fellowship would be better than expecting OpenGov to make good decisions in all domains.
Would you say your ideas are similar to the ones outlined here?