POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

Implement a randomized closure period toward the end of the established proposal’s voting timeframe. The exact closing moment of the DAO proposal will not be known to voters but will occur randomly within a predetermined percentage of the closing phase of the proposal voting period. This specific percentage and the parameters for randomness will be determined based on community feedback.

Example: Suppose the community agrees to implement a randomized closure within the last 20% of a 14-day voting period. This 20% translates to approximately 3 days. Therefore, the randomized closure could happen at any time during days 12 to 14 of the voting period. Voters would not know exactly when within this window the voting will close, encouraging them to cast their votes earlier rather than risking missing out if they wait until what they assume to be the last moment.

Extend the standard proposal voting period if significant voting activity occurs in the final hours or minutes. This extension will be triggered if the vote margin changes by more than a predefined percentage (to be determined through community input) within the last 24 hours. This allows stakeholders more time to evaluate and react to late swings in voting outcomes.

Example: Imagine on the 14th day—the final scheduled day of voting—a surge in votes occurs, resulting in a total vote count that increases by more than the predefined trigger of 10%(for instance). To accommodate this significant last-minute participation and allow time for all stakeholders to respond, the voting period could extended by an additional day(or other period defined by DAO).