Thanks brother. I was not able to understand what the proposal was tbh. No offence. But, it did look like something ChatGPT would spit out. I know that's probably an offensive statement if you've written it all on your own. Sorry if that is the case.

A few thoughts based on what I read:

1. One person, one vote may not be the most fair way to deal with stuff in every situation. e.g. Look at your SafetyNet Team. If I had one vote because I attended one meeting and you had one vote and you were doing all the heavy-lifting, how fair is it. And how to deal with alts, bots and fake accounts.

2. The issue with transparency especially in divisive topics that are split down the middle is that the side that loses might be inclined to consider parting and taking their own path.

3. Some conversations are best had outside of the blockchain - what about something that a competitor might benefit from knowing or something that might get used by a trader to front-run the project/team and make a profit - would that be considered you enabling insider trading.