Further improvements to the governance efficiency

This proposal will make voting periods shorter to allow for a swifter and more agile decision making process.

Motivation:

DAO governance is an equilibrium between velocity and security. The faster this process is, the more centralized and rash decisions are, making them potentially a risk for the DAO. Yet, long decision processes can hinder the effectiveness of the DAO and may prove to be a liability under specific circumstances where acting quickly is of the utmost importance.

The "Improving governance efficiency and security through decentralization" proposal made our decision process faster while still ensuring the safety of the DAO was preserved, notably by linking the speediness of a proposal with the involvement of the DAO (the more DAO members support a proposal the speedier it can be processed) and by baring the use of accelerated procedures to update our bylaws.

This proposal proposes the DAO to shorten our voting periods to allow the DAO to take swifter and more agile decisions while preserving our decentralization and limiting the risks inherent to shorter voting periods.

Implementation:

Under Section 5.4 (Proposal Voting Phase) of our by-laws, replace:

"The voting period lasts for 7 days."

with:

"The voting period lasts for 5 (five) days."

Under Section 5.6 (Emergency Proposal), replace:

"Voting for emergency proposals must still last for 7 days."

with:

"Voting for emergency proposals lasts for 3 (three) days."

Under Section 5.7 (Extreme Emergency Proposal), after "To do so, the Committee vote must be public and at least 3 Committee members must vote for it.", add:

"If at least 30 (thirty) senior members support the proposal, the voting period is shortened to 24 (twenty-four) hours."

Timeline:

Implementation would be immediate.

Total cost:

There would be no cost involved.

Risk assessment:

DAO governance is an equilibrium between velocity and security. A shorter voting period will always make the voting less safe as the DAO would have less time to ponder a proposal and less people will be able to vote for it. Nonetheless, the previously adopted "Improving governance efficiency and security through decentralization" proposal limits the risks by tying faster procedures to larger DAO members' involvement.

Going from 7 days to 5 days shouldn't present any significant risk as the period is very reasonable compared to even the biggest DAOs like Uniswap, ENS or GMX which are also using 5-day voting periods.

Going from 7 days to 3 days for an emergency proposal could be more risky. It would be up to the DAO to decide if the shorter voting period makes it worth it.

A 24-hour voting period for extreme emergency proposals would definitely present a risk for the DAO. This would however only happen under very rare and restricted situations and 10 additional DAO members would be required to support the proposal to mitigate the risk.

Counter-arguments, shortcomings and criticisms:

No criticisms about this proposal have been made yet