This topic is not of major importance but since there was some disagreement about the Snapshot vote description summary for vote 22, I thought it would be helpful to share a few approaches that other DAOs have used along with my brief analysis. Perhaps some of this can be used to inform how Snapshot descriptions are composed in the future.
I think the issue comes down to whether someone should summarize the candidates’ proposals in the Snapshot descriptions, or simply link to forum posts. I have been looking at the Snapshot descriptions for other DAO elections and there seem to be a few common methods.
Role description + one forum link for all applications
1 - mStableDAO Signer election (longer description)
2 - Rocket Pool pDAO Treasurer election (shorter description)
Role description + links to each candidate’s statement/application and social handle
1 - ENS Ecosystem Steward election
2 - Alchemist Council election
These examples tend to work better for candidates being elected to specific positions. When budgets or financial proposals are involved, the following projects have chosen to use a table approach.
Description + link to an Airtable spreadsheet with organized info
Description + link to a Notion spreadsheet with organized info
1 - Bankless DAO Gov Solutions Engineer election
Description + a simple table included in the Snapshot text
1 - ENS Endowment Fund Manager election
My ideal Snapshot description summary for election-style votes would involve:
- Brief summary of role or proposal being voted on
- Title of each candidate/proposal with link to forum post
- Proposed budget and length of time
- If necessary, a one-sentence description of each proposal written by the candidate/proposer themselves.
I liked the table approaches used by FWB DAO and Bankless DAO, which I think really helped to organize long forum posts into something more digestible for those short on time. Particularly for the budget proposals in the FWB DAO airtable spreadsheet.
It is worth noting that Snapshot descriptions are one part of the puzzle. Structuring the candidate posts/applications can also make an impact on comprehensibility. Direct inspiration should be taken from other DAOs, but voting assistance apps and voter information guides used outside of crypto can also provide frameworks for how to organize and simplify information for voters.
In short: I understand the tension between conciseness and meticulousness when it comes to explaining governance votes. I don’t think we can realistically expect most voters to wade through hours of forum discussions before voting. The current description format is acceptable to me, though it could be tweaked if others think it necessary. Some of the approaches mentioned in this post could be adopted for future Snapshot votes.
