Honestly I didn’t expect these two to be as split as they are. It is encouraging the amount of votes for and against them however.
Overall I think cutting the vote requirements is the most useful (because it requires zero costs and implementation) and xGov and/or Council vote to be useful for different reasons. It has come up before in discord about rethinking the vote limit and I just thought, ok well if no one is gonna make a proposal, I’ll make a proposal and we’ll see where it goes.
And personally I’m pro both of them or either of them and I’d hope the idea and position could evolve overtime as needed. I just want tinygovs to feel more empowered. Yes there’s not a lot we can do as individuals against a global economy, against wars, against whatever BTC does on any random Tuesday if a whale gets itchy and dumps, against VC’s, BUT there are enough of us that working together I do believe we can have real meaningful impact on both Tinyman and Algorand.
I also don’t see Algorand’s struggles as Tinyman’s struggles either, imo Tinyman as well as our partners in Algorand’s defi should work together to strengthen ourselves and each other. It is my firm beleif that while defi is not everything a blockchain can or should be, we can help reverse our chain’s fortunes. A strong Defi system = a strong Algorand.
I also agree with others that have at times voiced that Tinyman will likely be better positioned and more active post-VC unlocks, and I agree that it might. I just think we can be better positioned to take advantage of that as well as some concerns about how many govs might be eyeing an exit after so long of a lock. I’m sure there’s plenty of us willing to buy up their dumps, however I will always be an advocate for “What can we do to make this better for us” long-term questions.