Tao Voting, the New Name for Disputable Voting!

[gabi]

I think one of the key aspects of the confusion, as I see it, is still the fact that we are discussing a name for two different parts of the technological stack.

One is a front-end name given to Gardens decision proposals. And the other is the Aragon Application name.

My understanding is that no one is trying to change the name we are giving to the decision proposals in the front-end. I want to make this point clear once again because I still have a sense that this is still a point of confusion.

On the other hand, TEC focused on creating a good narrative around this new Aragon Application and distinguishing it from other similar existing Aragon Applications (Dandelion Voting and Voting). This new name is mostly relevant when dealing with the DAO settings or technical documentation that goes behind the scene to give more context about the DNA of the DAO.

Also I believe the two aspects are compatible with each other. We can have decision proposal on the Gardens front-end. And anyways decide we are going to call the Aragon Application responsible for creating those proposals Tao Voting.

[griffgreen]

The bad advice was my fault. But you’re being disingenuous here.
Looking back at our past conversations, we settled on Tao voting around the 24th of August. By the 13th of September it was clear that some were not happy with this choice. On our side, we chose to revert back to our original name - Decision voting - out of respect.

The original name was Disputable Voting, thats why this thread is titled as such. If the original name was Decision Voting there wouldn’t have been a need for a name change, it was just randomly put in the UI as Decision Voting… never communicated, no idea who decided to call it that, but its a great name!

Calling it Decision Voting was never communicated… here in this thread nor directly to me in DMs. If it had been, we could have pushed it and rippled thru the community as we did for Tao Voting. I am not being disingenuous. I am just feeling frustrated and feel like the needs of the users/community and frankly my own needs are being under-appreciated.

Having consistent naming is really important for the users to understand what is happening and to be able to jump from community to community with a shared language. Gardens is about to have a lot of eyes on it from these Param Parties that start this week. Having different sets of names for the same concepts is not how i want to play… walking into it… but this is the first moment i heard there was a final “Decision” on Tao Voting :-/ Sadly, it’s just too late to put in the work it would take to get the word out and change it everywhere. please don’t underestimate the work it takes to change a name.

I don’t know when Common Pool became a thing (after calling it funding pool for years) but once I found out (much later than the change occurred), I put forth the effort to call it Common Pool everywhere… In graphics, forum/blog posts (not all of them sadly), and most importantly, in the mind’s of our community members. We changed it all over the Commons Stack ecosystem! Even in https://sim.commonsstack.org

So, upon feeling that pain, we came in full force and tried to get solid names for all the Params that the TEC is documenting… we had great cooperation and standardized all the Parameter names… it was GREAT! But some how that cooperation ended? As now I also notice that Effective Supply has a new name… Active Supply… I think? Is that solid? the front page just says Active and I can’t find it referenced in the documentation but I was testing the Onboarding app and saw it there in the advanced settings for what used to be Minimum Effective Supply

I am leading a lot of documentation and educational efforts and just need to be looped in on these changes to be effective in my work… it is a huge synergy opportunity.

The Commons Stack, TEC and Giveth are all using this stuff and I am a great point person for all of them for updates on naming or anything else.

We are on the same team. I’m sorry for the frustrated tone of this post, but it’s really easy to criticize any name. It’s just a Name. I don’t care if you call me Griff or Santa… but if you call me Santa, no one outside of my burner friends will know who you are talking about… there is no need to do that with Gardens there is no benefit to have two groups with different names for the same things.