Thanks @jengajojo_daoplomats for this proposal, it was an topic that we and other delegates felt was necessary given the current state of the DAO.
However, we agree with @jameskbh that while it is clear that the quorum needs to be increased for security reasons to prevent possible risks to governance, it is still too early to know the impact of the DIP, in fact 3 new delegates have presented themselves in the last 20 days which shows that the DAO is in the process of adapting to the new circumstances that we have promoted. Perhaps it would be prudent to take a more gradual approach, to increase the quorum at this time by a slightly lower percentage than the 8% proposed, to avoid any possible risk of paralysing the DAO, and in a few months time, when the DIP is more consolidated, to review this topic, analyse again what participation has been and decide whether a new increase in the quorum is appropriate. Does this make sense?
In another matter, and regarding the formality of the proposal posted in the forum, we would kindly request that you edit the title to “PIP-XX: Increase Quorum Threshold” to comply with the PIP framework. According to the guidelines, during the debate stage, the appropriate nomenclature is “PIP-XX,” and the proposal should only be assigned a number once it is submitted to Snapshot. This ensures numerical correlation between the proposals posted on Snapshot, as multiple proposals may be debated simultaneously, and one may take longer than another. Assigning the number only when it goes to Snapshot guarantees numerical consistency at the start of the voting process.