Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Discussion] Allowing content above the Proposal Creation form #2128

Open
DefiDebauchery opened this issue Apr 8, 2022 · 12 comments
Open

[Discussion] Allowing content above the Proposal Creation form #2128

DefiDebauchery opened this issue Apr 8, 2022 · 12 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request feature-request

Comments

@DefiDebauchery
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Many Spaces suffer from low-quality Proposals, which I believe is due in part to an absence of guidelines or other communication being available in the voting portal.

Snapshot's default personalization fields do not provide any way of communicating guidance to users, and according to @mktcode in the Snapshot Discord, could not be extended via plugins, as there is no render area above the Proposal Create form.

Describe the solution you'd like
Preferably, I believe all Spaces would benefit from this field being part of Snapshot's base personalization settings. Whether a full list of proposal guidelines, or simply set expectations for what a successful Proposal tangibly means, I believe many-to-most Spaces would utilize this.

However, at least providing an area before the Proposal Create form to be an update target would allow Plugin creators to build it out.

@mktcode mktcode added enhancement New feature or request plugin labels Apr 8, 2022
@mktcode
Copy link
Contributor

mktcode commented Apr 8, 2022

Adding another slot for plugins to render content configured in space/plugin settings would in fact be rather easy to implement. But maybe it would make more sense to add this as core functionality. A plugin might stay unnoticed by many. A new text field in the settings would be more visible. @bonustrack @samuveth @metrox-eth what do you think?

@samuveth
Copy link
Contributor

samuveth commented Apr 9, 2022

Yes I think adding this to our settings would be best. Another features that could go will with this or could even be an alternative are templates. Similar to github issue templates.

@bonustrack
Copy link
Member

@samuveth Agree, we can add a field "guidelines" on the space level.

@mktcode
Copy link
Contributor

mktcode commented Apr 11, 2022

So now there's guidelines vs templates. Guidelines would be rather simple to implement. A new textarea field in the settings and then either prepolulate the textarea on proposal creation page or displaying it separately in a collapsible block. One little question might be whether we want a markdown preview for this settings field or not.

The template approach would be a bit more involved. It would require a more complex settings area where you can add, remove, edit templates, and also set a default one. Some code from the strategies/plugins dialogues could be reused maybe. On the creation page the content field needs to be filled with the default template and it needs some dropdown to select a template. And then this would require some logic, e.g. to make sure things don't get lost when switching the template and make it play nicely with drafts.

So we're probably roughly talking about 1 day vs 3-4 days. Regarding the benefit it has, I think even two weeks would be ok. Maybe we could even come up with a template ourselves. Some generalized best practices for writing a proposal.

I think guidelines in a separate collapsible block might be the lowest hanging fruit here. Internally it could be called "templates" and stored in an array, in case we wanna upgrade one day. But maybe that would be two separate things then anyway.

@samuveth
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah I think they should be separate. I'm thinking of guidelines as an URL field in the space settings and a external link block on the proposal creation page. A bit like the discussion field we just added.

@mktcode
Copy link
Contributor

mktcode commented Apr 12, 2022

Well, that would definitely be the most simple but effective solution. One hour effort. :D

@DefiDebauchery
Copy link
Author

Greetings! Just wanted to follow up on this.

Having a markdown-enabled Guidelines space for the proposal creation page would be the ideal, but external link would be okay as long as it is shown through an iframe (noting the correlation to the discussion field)

So many spaces are suffering from low-quality submissions. I still believe having something would help provide enough guidance to submitters.

@DefiDebauchery
Copy link
Author

It's been quite a bit since we have discussed this.

Many spaces still suffer from being able to provide guidance on what constitutes a "good" (or in many cases, "valid") proposal. Having this information front and center when creating a Proposal would greatly reduce resulting strife if such a submission needs to be removed.

Additionally, I still believe it should be a direct Markdown field rather than a link, since such guidelines are central to the platform itself.

Any updates that can be shared, especially if it's "one hour effort"? cc: @mktcode

@zzuziak
Copy link
Contributor

zzuziak commented Feb 7, 2023

@bonustrack shall we change the Guidelines field to a Markdown instead? We can suggest rendering an URL (the [ ] ( ) syntax) if a specific space holds their guildelines somewhere else.

@samuveth
Copy link
Contributor

samuveth commented Feb 9, 2023

@zzuziak No, settings are already to big when signing. Before we think about this we need to fix settings on hub!

@zzuziak
Copy link
Contributor

zzuziak commented Feb 10, 2023

Is there an issue related to that on Hub? If so, could you link it here @samuveth 🙏

@samuveth
Copy link
Contributor

@zzuziak Yes, it's here snapshot-labs/snapshot-hub#391

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request feature-request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants