Based on this proposal doc for The representatives setup from 2022
The way the NFT ecosystem works but also Twitter, social media and society as a whole is set up makes it so marginalised voices don’t get the same opportunities. This could be due to but not limited to: a language barrier in both communication and information, time in the NFT space is largely centred around USA availability, internet access where they live, personal circumstances. Marginalised people experience personal and at times intergenerational repercussions due to circumstances which the majority may be far removed from and either 1. Do not see the value in promoting equity 2. Don’t perceive the inequality perhaps because they aren’t exposed to it in their lives. Someone's perception that any of this bigotry isn’t prevalent doesn’t stop the harm from being done which is what we are trying to alleviate in the community where we can.
One of the many reasons for this is due to the lack of marginalised people in any NFT governance, so issues are either not brought up (as they aren’t seen as important to governance) or they aren’t taken seriously (people are far removed from issues marginalised people face daily as well as generationally). This initiative is a way to ensure that marginalised perspectives are respected in a concrete way that mitigates the impact of racism, sexism, ableism or any other bias.
All communities should have the agency and sovereignty to make decisions with the vote they receive from the community without persecution or judgement within a larger decentralized community to promote their own communities interests and priorities- which often align with the wider community, but often certain issues aren’t highlighted. For example, In most cases of charitable donations or donated aid from western countries by economically bigger entities, this comes with the ‘catch’ of funding control or a say on how to use these funds, “tied/conditional aid”. This is not a gift, this is manipulation and often comes with a ‘if you do this for us, we will do this for you, but only if you do this for us.’ kind of culture.
Remember that this initiative is about inclusion of people who rarely have a chance to have a say in a way that betters their community within the tez NFT space. This is not about exclusivity which is already prevalent as real opportunities for equity haven’t been explored sufficiently within this space. New ideas could be brought forward which may solve complex issues, or foster new growth. If no one is able to learn from those ideas because they are not present, the community health is at risk.
Aim: To reach equity in the tezos NFT space by including underrepresented collectives in the global and NFT space in governance. HOW? Giving nominated community leaders the chance to make decisions within Teia that are best for their community.
Aim: To ensure governance is diverse. To ensure decisions are made with an accurate cross-section of Teia being represented. HOW? By bringing together a diverse and varied group of people - all whom are passionate about the Teia community as a whole.
To give community leaders agency over their own vote to use voting power in their communities best interest. HOW? By giving reps a vote and allowing them to vote in their communities best interest without terms and conditions.
To avoid tokenism at all costs - diversity must be in governance not for symbolic show or virtue signalling HOW? By genuinely supporting the communities our marginalised artists come from by allowing their perspectives and POV to be heard and having a vote when it comes to governance.
In the DAO contracts that will be used for Teia’s Governance in the future, 30% of total DAO voting power is given to representatives to vote in their communities best interest. (tbd: should the reps setup only get activated once there are enough reps nominated?)
All representatives (= committee) will be added to a Teia multisig setup in which any DAO proposal can be voted on. Every DAO proposal will be about a yes or no vote, so the multisig will collectively vote yes/no via a multisig vote. If the multisig vote passes the needed yes votes to pass (55%) there will be 30% voting power added to the yes votes of the main DAO proposal.
We will need to implemment a solution in case there are only a very smalll amount of representatives in the multisig. For one, we need to make sure no individual has 10% or more voting power, and also, the rep multisig only makes sense to have such a high % of voting power, if it actually is filled with a diverse group of peoople from all kinds of backgrounds.
The community should decide of a minimum amount of representatives in order to put the rep setup into action. The multisig should also have a max amout of reps.
A possible solution: Every representative vote could be at most 2% of the total votes. If 3 representatives vote, their vote will count as 6%. If 40 representatives vote, their total vote will be the maximum representatives vote: 30% (to be discussed)