Voting on various OpenGov referendums is the individual's choice and preference for governance matters. A person may not want their preferences on specific matters open to the public (which can be debated on and on regarding transparency et al) and the only purpose to have pure proxies. Please correct me if I am wrong or missing anything.

Curators of Bounties are elected or approved by the community via Treasury referendum, typically based on their reputation, expertise and knowledge in a given field.   Managing a bounty and the allocation of child bounties by its curators are not transferable and the decisions by curators must be transparent, as the use of pure proxies violates the trust and contradicts the best interest of the community.

The continuous erosion of trust is irreversible, which requires more aggressive and proactive action by community leaders instead of the complacent reactive stance waiting for the majority to discuss, propose, debate and repeat.




Pure Proxies should only be available for voting on referendums - not by Curators of a Bounty

- Problem Statement: Individuals may not want their voting preferences on governance matters to be public, leading to debates on transparency in OpenGov referendums.
- Significance: Transparency in the selection and decision-making process of curators for Bounties is crucial to maintain trust and community interest.
- Proposed Solution: Elect or approve curators based on reputation, expertise, and knowledge, ensuring transparent decisions and non-transferable bounty management.
- Expected Outcomes: Increased trust through proactive community leadership and avoidance of pure proxies in decision-making processes.

#2398 Pure Proxies should only be available for voting on referendums - not by Curators of a Bounty

No Active Proposals