Thanks to all who voted. I appreciate everyone's comments and will take them into consideration for the next draft. :clinking_glasses:

Implementing Tenure Restrictions for DAO Committee Members This proposal has been PASSED by a DAO Committee Member (0xbef99f5f55cf7cdb3a70998c57061b7e1386a9b0)

Implementing Tenure Restrictions for DAO Committee Members This proposal is now in status: FINISHED. Voting Results: * Yes 49% 2,645,270 VP (65 votes) * No 36% 1,956,388 VP (14 votes) * Invalid question/options 15% 827,670 VP (5 votes)

Voting **No**, There is not glamour or power on being a DAO Committee, its a purely technical/administrative role. There is no reason to terminate people unless they do a bad job.

I don’t know about a time limit, perhaps an evaluation of performance every x months would be a better approach.

[quote="HPrivakos, post:5, topic:20088"] you always need to retrain and not everyone can be trusted. [/quote] They were two differents points in my answer. There is no way to train people to be trusted, no. You can train people the needed skills though, it just takes times, which is unnecessary if the only reason is "the term expired"

so basically we don't have a system to train *TRUSTED, QUALIFIED and VETTED* people to allow the DAO committee to evolve as it will inevitably. I hope you are healthy HP, we need you to stay alive forever.

My vote is invalid but I appreciate you for engaging with me in our Discord conversation.

I have to agree with HP on this one.

I agree with both Ginoct and HP... term limits could be good for when you have a committee member not meeting the expectations of the job and they need to be replaced. However method of termination is not how most jobs work. Politicians have terms, but most employees do not. There is a reason... As HP said, the amount of energy needed to retain new individuals should not be overlooked. It takes years to become truly efficient in a job. We would lose experience and knowledge if we replaced committee members on a regular basis. Hopefully if there is an issue with a committee member, we can use the chain of command like other business models do, and find a way to remove them in an equitable and professional manner. If I'm missing something, please feel free to let me know, I'm always open to new opinions.

We need trusted and skilled people for that role. If you rotate them frequently, you always need to retrain and not everyone can be trusted. You are giving the keys to millions of USD to random untrained people, just because "we need to rotate". I find this proposal useless and dangerous.

We should implement term limits for all Committees (Wearables, DAO, Revocations) and maybe have a special policy for SAB members.

We still need a policy in play for the governance committee.

Time limits are arbitrary and it’s not that hard to remove someone if needed.