BPIP#5 - REJECTED - However, a loop hole was found to put it up a second time to vote!

Surprise, surprise… the vote was rejected, and once again, a loophole was cited—in this case, that some Stake DAO token holders couldn’t vote.

Link to Original Snapshot (where only six BPT wallets voted): h t t p s://snapshot.org/#/blackpoolhq.eth/proposal/0x037d14f255f19727aba06a3fd44535cd5d3411a06299d3d17a7d6f2c0e6b4b31

As noted on my vote comment, I’m not opposed to liquidation, but after 3.5 years of dedicating myself to this project and navigating internal challenges, I feel it’s essential to ensure transparency on this matter.

Even if there are only a few who share this view, I believe investors and token holders deserve a clear explanation of the investment history prior to winding down.

This DAO raised $6 million to invest in NFT projects, and it has yet to be shown that even half of this amount was deployed in such ventures. Is it not a fair question to ask: how were the funds allocated?

So, while I support liquidation, I strongly believe that a closing procedure should include a breakdown of investments across each game/project as well as transparency on any uninvested funds.

If this condition can be added to the revised #BPIP5 proposal, I’m willing to support it and hope this transparency will help us all understand the flow of funds.

If it cannot be added, I find it difficult to understand the reasoning behind voting in favour.

YNWA