There is a CIP draft open that would change how governance actions get ratified, and the discussion has barely left the GitHub thread like @Martin Lang flagged here on X.
You can read the draft here: cardano-foundation/CIPs#1164
Today an action needs active CC approval. Under this proposal it counts as constitutional by default and ratifies unless a single CC member votes No, which reopens the normal CIP-1694 process. The ledger change needs a hard fork, but the draft also sketches a soft activation that does not: the CC announces it will vote Yes on everything by default and only vote No when it sees a problem. That could start next epoch.
I am against it.
- An absent CC currently blocks an action. Under this rule an absent CC ratifies it. Silence is not a finding of constitutionality.
- Every CC vote today carries a rationale anyone can read and challenge later. Default approval leaves nothing to audit.
- One member can veto in the last block of an epoch. The draft acknowledges this and answers it with a state of no confidence after the fact.
- The record does support the premise: 80 actions crossed their DRep threshold and the CC blocked none of them. It does not support the saving. 39 of 151 actions with CC votes carried at least one No, 9 of them enacted anyway. Every one of those would have reopened the full process under this rule.
What do you make of it? I would rather see this argued out here than have a soft activation quietly turn it into the default.