I am a little confused as to how this works. Is a proposal meant to be all encompassing trying to cover everything in one go, or can/should we have a multitude of proposals that can work together and pick and chose from each parts.
For example I really don’t get governance. I get decision making, etc. but I don’t understand the implications of different types (as been made painfully obvious on these forums) so with my proposals I would like to simplify them as much as possible and remove the stuff about voting, etc.
I am not 100% sure who to ask at the ECC, I know you are all busy but have provided really good feedback recently. so sorry for @ ing you @daira@str4d@nathan-at-least (why have @'s stopped auto completing)
Once we have past the 31st dead line, can we still take parts of one proposal and put it into another proposal? or is it “there can be only one”?
Closer to all-encompassing. Each proposal should be cohesive and complete. It can still duplicate part of a different proposal, or be equivalent in some other way (although that should be referenced). It’s okay for proposals to overlap, but like a Venn diagram, not like two circles on top of each other. Does that make sense?