In several posts, as well as the poll in Valdorff’s thread (pDAO guardian multisig charter - #17 by Valdorff) people expressed hesitation with the proposed ‘community vote, no reserved team / oDAO seats’ pDAO multisig, even though the poll majority was in favor of that variant.
My interpretation of @langers’ post above, please correct me if I’m wrong, is that the team wishes to move the pDAO multisig to a team + oDAO controlled wallet in the short term (a further restricted version of the 3rd poll option), while being open to different, more community-inclusive governance (like the 1st poll option) in the longer term, once we further redesign/limit pDAO guardian powers.
My personal opinion is that this is a good, stepwise approach to enhance pDAO guardian security with a multisig in the short term, while still having a plan to decentralize the guardian later on, once we minimize protocol risks involved.
Perhaps we should consider bringing this choice to snapshot, so the original ‘no-limit community multisig vote’ vs. the ‘phased team plan’ described above? In either case bundled with an interim pDAO charter. Unless the team is unwilling to go with the first option at this time anyway, in which case a vote would be moot.