← Back to Gnosis
Gnosis · closed proposal
GIP-156: Should @Citrullin be banned from GnosisDAO Governance and Communication Channels?
0x918c…755F·ended 15d ago
🐳 Whale activity
Voters
20
GNO voted
23.37K
≈$2.75M
Token price
$118
AI summary
Summary pending — generation runs every 15 minutes.
Voting results
Quorum
23.37K / 75.00K GNO(31%)
For23.33K (99.8%)
Against13 (0.1%)
Abstain25 (0.1%)
23.37K GNO · ≈$2.75M · 20 votersblock 25771772
Votes over time
x-axis = % of voting window elapsed · y-axis = cumulative VP per choice
🐳 Whale votes
6 votes > 5% VP0x753f…8e4d
20d ago · voted For
80.4%
18.72K VP
≈$2.20M
0xbaf6…2140
20d ago · voted For
19.3%
4.48K VP
≈$527.6K
0x42fc…174d
22d ago · voted For
97.4%
44 VP
≈$5.2K
0x2f60…2e27
21d ago · voted For
37.0%
30 VP
≈$3.6K
0xd394…dea1
21d ago · voted For
12.2%
6 VP
≈$737
0x918c…755f
22d ago · voted Abstain
100.0%
1 VP
≈$126
Full proposal
Original markdown · Gnosis
Author: Philipp-Alexander Blum (@Citrullin) Status: Phase 3 (Direct Snapshot Referendum) Category: Governance, Transparency & Contributor Rights Voting System: Single-Choice Voting (YES / NO / ABSTAIN)
Executive Summary
This proposal puts a direct question to GNO token holders and validators: Should independent engineer and contributor Philipp Blum (@Citrullin) remain banned from GnosisDAO Discourse, Discord, and official communication channels?
Following the [publication of an open-source proof-of-concept for a stateless zkEVM Account-Lattice](https://forum.gnosis.io…
📚 Similar past proposals
Finding similar proposals…