I have the highest respect for DReps like
@phil_uplc and
@yutazzz. They have been instrumental in the proposal review component of
@IntersectMBO's Cardano Budget process.
However, I disagree that we need 39 Treasury Withdrawals on chain. As Yuta points out, the DReps started with 194 proposals that they reviewed, criticized, and negotiated with proposors. This wasn't just over 12 days (though, that was the latest deadline) there were many proposals submitted early and those who submitted later in the process benefitted from seeing the refinement take place.
After the Socialization period was complete and significant changes were made to the proposals based on feedback, the DReps logged into the Ekklesia platform and cast their final votes for which proposals would be eligible to be included in the Budget submitted by Intersect. That is how we came up with our list of 39.
Now, I do understand what Phil is saying about how this important of a decision deserves having the DReps take extra time and applying extra scrutiny to carry it out. But in defense of those of us advocating for "simplicity," most of this review and scrutiny has already been done through the off-chain Socialization and Ekklesia voting process. What we are doing now is formalizing it with the on-chain vote.
Maybe this sounds silly, but we should probably consider the amount of time it will take a DRep who uses a Ledger Hardware Wallet to cast 39 votes as a physical action.
Assuming they've already connected their wallet to GovTools and have logged in to their DRep Account they will now need to 1) Navigate to the first governance action page, 2) Choose Yes/No/Abstain/, 3) Click the pop-up window of their wallet interface to confirm they want to sign, 4) Pick up their physical hardware device and look at the screen, 5) Make a conscious decision to not review the signature hash on their device LCD screen because that would take extra time - and just click the toggle buttons to approve the signature trusting it is correct, 6) click the toggle buttons to approve the witness, 7) click the toggle buttons to approve the transaction fee, 8) click the toggle buttons to approve submitting the transaction on chain, 9) going back to the computer screen and reviewing the confirmation that the vote transaction was successfully submitted, 10) clicking the "back" button on their browser to go back to the governance action list in GovTools and finding the second governance action page... so they can repeat... 38x.
I think 3 minutes per governance action is a fair estimate of the manual process for submitting each governance action in this way. That means 2 hours of JUST clicking buttons to submit votes for 39 proposals. That does not include any of the time that might want to be spent re-reading the proposals, yet again, to see how they match up with the Socialization process that Intersect already conducted.
I'm sure that many will be of the opinion that "it is the job of the DReps" to do this. Yes, I agree that it is their job. But it's also the job of Intersect to see if we can help make it easier by streamlining the process where and when we can. That was the point of the off-chain socialization process.
We have already seen a big filter applied to the projects that wanted to receive funding from the Cardano Treasury. We told 80% of them "no, not this round" when the DReps voted on who would get included in the Budget that Intersect proposed.
If we go with the 2 Bracket Option, Intersect will split up the approved proposals between those who had a simple majority (51%-66%) and those who had a super majority (67% ) and submit these as two separate Treasury Withdrawals so that the DReps can choose to accept one or both.
If we go with the 5 Bracket Option, Intersect will split up the approved proposals into 10-point ranges (50-59%, 60-69%, etc) so that the DReps have more granularity on which proposals to support based on their preliminary rankings.
Finally, if the DReps really want to see all 39 put on chain separately - then I will be your advocate and push for that to be the course we take. But I hope you understand the concern I have that this really does add extra complexity for the average person trying to serve as a DRep who has already been engaged for the past three months.
Whatever the case, I hope that no matter which position you hold you can extend goodwill and understanding to those who hold positions that might be different from your own. Everyone I've had the pleasure of working with in Cardano governance is here because they genuinely love the ecosystem and dream of systems that allow us to collaborate in better ways. We might have different ideas of how to get there but we are all working for the same thing and the work is not done yet by any means!