Here’s a recent example of exactly what you’re asking about: Proposal To Close Non-Essential Working Groups
Here’s a previous example of a different proposal aimed at the Special Council, which was subsequently Returned for Reconstruction:
AIP-359 : Special Council Vote of No Confidence
Special Council: “This AIP attempts to force the APE Foundation into multiple courses of action which would create significant risks and would not be consistent with the wellbeing of the APE Foundation and the ApeCoin DAO. ”
Generally, it’s okay to discuss most topics. Moving forward to a vote does involve various aspects of due diligence in regards to the DAO’s guidelines and the mission/values of the APE Foundation.
GUIDELINES
Every year, there is a DAO-wide vote to determine which DAO members will serve on a special council on the APE Foundation (the DAO’s “Board”). The purpose of the Board is to administer DAO proposals and serve the vision of the community.
A Board member may be removed and replaced prior to the term pursuant to a majority vote of token holders.
The total cost of implementation must be clear in order for a proposal to go to vote.
DAO members must search past proposals to ensure any idea they intend to write a proposal for has not already been submitted.
If a suggested proposal directly conflicts with a proposal that is currently up for vote, the second proposal should not go for a vote until a decision is made on the first proposal to avoid approval of opposing requirements.
A suggested proposal that directly conflicts with another approved proposal cannot go to vote for three months after the original proposal has been implemented to avoid wasting community assets.
Proposals will not be considered/put up for a vote if they involve illegal activity, hate speech, pornographic material, or are at odds with the mission or values of the APE Foundation.
Hope this helps !
3 Likes
