A couple suggestions:
If you ask “Do you believe A or B?”, the options should be in the order A and then B, for clarity, so how about reversing the order of answer options for the Major Grant Review Committee question?
For the funding cap question, the answer
could be changed to include the word "additional’ in front of spending restrictions, or even better yet just leave it as “The other accountability requirements prescribed in the ZIP are sufficient”. The last part of that answer saying “there shouldn’t be funding restrictions” is a bit misleading since the ZIP does list several restrictions such as “ECC must undertake a firm obligation to use the Dev Fund only in support of the Zcash cryptocurrency and its community.”
One other possibility that I actually think is the best of all is to simply negate the first answer option: “There should not be a Funding Target and Volatility Reserve for each slice as prescribed in the ZIP” This is better because the opposite of wanting a funding cap is not wanting a funding cap, but the question makes it seem like that opposite of a funding cap is the belief that the other requirements are sufficient, which is really not necessarily the position of someone who doesn’t want a funding cap. I also think the term “Funding Cap” should be used instead of “Funding Target”.
Overall I think it is important to recognize that it is possible to drastically sway the outcomes of polls by making subtle changes to the wording, as has been demonstrated by many academic studies. I do not mean to imply any bad intent, but I do think that we should try to reach a consensus where all of the poll questions have a neutral tone that won’t impact the results. 