Why not modify this proposal to require 250ATOMs (or whatever was recently decided) for the total amount? I would consider maybe 50ATOMs for the submitter, and 250ATOMs total.
It seems fair for the proposal amount to be a shared burden for a community crowdfund, because not everyone has 250ATOMs to put up.
With that, it seems like an improvement that has a chance of passing, and certainly adds to this discussion.
It doesn’t matter what proposal recently passed, anyone who puts up the deposit should have their proposal seen, end of story. If this doesn’t work it’s up to the chain to solve the spam problem through code. Nothing to complain about.
The difficult part in naming things “spam” is that not everyone perceives spam the same way. What matters to one does not have to matter for someone else and vice versa.
So I am totally a fan of your statement:
It doesn’t matter what proposal recently passed, anyone who puts up the deposit should have their proposal seen, end of story.
It does matter though if it is pre-discussed on the forum or a Commonwealth where people can already discuss whether something should go on-chain. Things can be tackled that way before it goes on-chain, effectively reducing non-needed proposals.
I wanted to know if this is an appropriate forum to bring up the issues the community is having with the, “No with Veto”, option in governance. I have no issue with the proposed item, as it promotes inclusion into governance and participation into the proposal creation.
However the issues I and a segment of the community are having with how certain parties are using NWV, grows as these parties misuse the system to invalidate successful props and punish proposers by burning their deposits.
NWV was meant to dissuade spam props and bad actors, yet it is instead being used to gate-keep the ecosystem and stymie innovation.
As for prop 75, It is so widely defined that these rules can be used to justify any use of NWV, not the mention the fact that there are no onchain means of limiting how NWV is used nor any means of sanctioning it’s misuse.