I propose that there be select criteria for determining acceptable proposals. The following is my proposed list of guidelines:

PROPOSED GUIDELINES

1. Proposals must be plausible. Proposals that are theoretically impossible, practically impossible, far too difficult, or heavily resource intensive will be rejected or revisited when they become plausible.
2. Proposals must be well intentioned. Proposals that are of an unserious nature, offensive nature, or have no applicability to the KogeCoin brand will likely be ignored.
3. Proposals must be fair. Proposals that are loaded, whether with trick questions or unfair answers, will be rejected or rewritten in a way that is fair. Proposals that force a person to do something they are unwilling to do will be rejected.
4. Proposals must be clearly written English. Proposals that are poorly written, written in another language, or hard to understand will be rejected and rewritten, if possible.
5. Proposals must be comprehensible. Proposals that are too complex may be rejected and rewritten, either by adding a TLDR or by breaking down the proposal into multiple proposals.

HOW TO VOTE

The following options are available for voting:

1. Go with the above guidelines. These do not suck, but new governance proposals can amend or replace them.
2. Let the KogeCoin team come up with better, more detailed guidelines that don't suck as hard.
3. No guidelines as long as possible. Everyone plays fair, and if things start to get out of hand, the threshold for proposal writing will go up until the shenanigans stop.
4. Go with the above guidelines for now, but hold elections in the near future for qualified delegates to write proposals based on a secondary system of voted proposal requests.