I don’t think we need a poll here now (but always feel free to add now, I think one could have been in the original post, people that know me, know I’m a big fan of gov post polls ^^).
What would be helpful I think is some details what the proposal is about in regards to our current POL position, it’s maybe implied here and there but not rly written out.
We currently have a quite big POL, Poolexplorer has a quiet nice overview of that:
Currently roughly 650k POOL and 31 ETH.
Do you wanna:
Add another full range LP in addition to that or
Remove the current POL and redeploy it as full range with only the current funds (which would mean there is unused POOL that would be returned to treasury because the LP has more POOL than ETH) or
Remove the current POL and redeploy it as full range with additional funds from treasury and if so how much (31 ETH are currently roughly 90k POOL, so we still got 560k POOL that would need ETH to pair with).
Also the decision what fee to choose, in the OP you suggested 1%, is that what the position should be?
Additional to that there are technical details how we do it on chain. We haven’t done any Uniswap transactions directly on chain yet and usually go the route to just send to a Gnosis Safe, do the tx and send back to treasury (probably Exec Team in this case, although I know underethsea would prefer not custody and more funds, it would be just for a short time, but would still need their approval to execute this proposal).
The proposal should also explain the why, the benefits, drawbacks and risks.
In this case this would entail stuff like, cost for the treasury if adding new funds, less upside liquidity, more downside liquidity, claiming current fees from the LPs, funds being in custody of Exec Team of a short time.
I know Governance and making a proposal can be quite complex and deciding for a concrete way is not easy but it’s usually the best way to have a working proposal and then collaboratively decide needed changes instead of trying to work out the proposal from scratch via polls with everyone ^^
Next step would probably be a real proposal with a [RFC] at the beginning in the title for “Request for comments” where a plan to execute is proposed and where people can still suggest changes, if there are no voices against, we can do a PTIP-X with the final params and vote on that! (Tbh I’m not the biggest fan of the middle step with the RFC and think some stuff can go directly to PTIP but if there are lots of changes it can make sense to still have an overview, if people edit the original post directly it’s rly hard to understand what exactly changed compared to the final proposal)
I can help with the planning and write up and appreciate you as a first timer participating in Governance and wanna make that as nice as possible!