Skip to content

feat: add contract allowing members to vote on veto proposals #218

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: old-main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

0xble
Copy link
Collaborator

@0xble 0xble commented Feb 6, 2023

Motivation

Allow members (non-hosts) in a party to coordinate on vetoing proposals (eg. malicious proposals).

Solution

Adds a contract called VetoProposal that allows members of a party that has this contract as a host to vote to veto a proposal.

If enough votes are cast, this contract will veto the proposal on behalf of its members.

@height
Copy link

height bot commented Feb 6, 2023

Link Height tasks by mentioning a task ID in the pull request title or commit messages, or description and comments with the keyword link (e.g. "Link T-123").

💡Tip: You can also use "Close T-X" to automatically close a task when the pull request is merged.

@johncpalmer
Copy link
Contributor

sick...we could start building UI for this already...

@0xble
Copy link
Collaborator Author

0xble commented Feb 7, 2023

sick...we could start building UI for this already...

Definitely, should we get a sanity check from horsefacts that this is good to go?

@0xble 0xble added feature Add functionality proposal Related to party proposals labels Apr 2, 2023
@0xble 0xble closed this Apr 21, 2023
@0xble 0xble deleted the feat/party-veto branch April 21, 2023 18:18
@0xble 0xble restored the feat/party-veto branch April 21, 2023 18:33
@0xble 0xble reopened this Apr 21, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature Add functionality proposal Related to party proposals
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants