Let’s have new roles in Discord relative to the volume of staked JUP the community member has. This will help the community see how big an influence a member has in upcoming DAO votes. We could also extend this to JUP platform users who might not yet have any JUP holdings, for example providing roles for high volume users of JUP products.
( Believe in something , I choose JUP )
I’m curious about how this will contribute to the growth of the DAO. While I respect your perspective, don’t you think there’s a risk of creating some form of classicism in the process?
Not just classicism but physical safety as well. This would do more harm than good.
In terms of assisting growth, the new roles will help the community see the type of individual making certain comments or reacting to things in certain ways. I believe this level of insight will help to establish key thoughts and trends of opinion amongst distinct user groups as we move forward. For example, let’s say there’s a discussion surrounding making significant changes to the perps platform. You might start to see whale JUP holders being massively in favour , yet the actual perps platform users might massively disagree. Right now we can’t differentiate in the DC. It’s all just noise from everyone. Having roles as I’ve suggested will help to see the opinion and effect on changes across these distinct groups.
Hey! We already have discord roles , albeit none of the current roles relate to the level of investment or interaction each individual has with JUP.
We already have an active DAO which has an inbuilt hierarchy relative to the volume of staked JUP each in individual has.
Hierarchy isn’t a bad thing, even in a DAO. Take a read here. Some interesting thoughts :
One in particular is this “Hierarchies will form even if you don’t want them to, just in less transparent ways”
I’m all for transparency.
Hi. Thanks for taking the time to read my post and enter the discussion. I’m interested in the concern around “public safety”. I’ve been in many DC’s for crypto related projects, most of which have tiered roles relative to holdings. For example, most ( if not all ) NFT DC’s adopt this approach. I’ve not once came across a safety issue or heard of one.
If this is truly a concern individuals may have , I would suggest those individuals refrain from providing their wallet ID such that the verification process could take place to determine the type and size of user the person is. That way they would be able to remain fully anonymous regarding their holdings / profile yet would be able to continue with their contributions to discussions, albeit from an anonymous standpoint.
Thanks 
Hello! Thank you making this idea/proposal. Btw, I have created a reddit & x/twitter post for this for more visibility. You might wanna check them out. 
[quote=“Lt.Whiskers, post:6, topic:36266”]
I would suggest those individuals refrain from providing their wallet ID such that the verification process could take place to determine the type and size of user the person is. That way they would be able to remain fully anonymous regarding their holdings / profile yet would be able to continue with their contributions to discussions, albeit from an anonymous standpoint.
it’s the best way! Totally right
Not necessary. Voting should always be private otherwise it invites unsavoury behaviours (namely bribes). There’s also the security aspect. Large holders do not want to be doxxed.
Interesting proposal though
…VIP! totally with you, Voting should be PRIVATE (…sounds familiar to me in my country 
).
regards JupCats
Great. More visibility is awesome. Thanks for that
No worries at all! There’s a lot of replies on both Twitter & Reddit, you might wanna check it out. 
I don’t have much JUP but I don’t want to share the amount on discord…
NO NO AND MORE NO. I am fully against this idea.
it’s unnecessary … risky. One of the principals rules: never mention how much you owned // 
with you! Privacy is your safe place