@murchadh Thanks for bringing this up. We have two methods of executing governance - Snapshot and Tally. With Snapshot, a Committee member must post the proposal, but with Tally, anyone with sufficient voting power of 1% can do so and the result is automatically executed, so that in theory a malicious actor could submit and pass a proposal, which would drain the Treasury for instance automatically. The time delay gives the Committee an opportunity to stop this, since only proposals that do not 'further the Vision and Mission of ContinuumDAO as laid out in this Constitution' should be allowed to execute. This is a safety mechanism that many other DAOs also use.
The Constitution also says that 'if the proposal is re-submitted unaltered and if it once again passes, then the Committee may not squash the vote outcome for a second time'. This limits the power of the Committee to ignore the will of the DAO.
