Determine Voting Criteria (RPIP-4) [eligible voters: all nodes]

This vote will determine eligible voters for future pDAO governance votes. There are two concurrent votes to determine voting criteria: - `Determine Voting Criteria (RPIP-4) [eligible voters: all nodes]` - `Determine Voting Criteria (RPIP-4) [eligible voters: nodes w/RPL ≥10% borrowed ETH]` These votes are identical except that different strategies were used to determine voter eligibility. Vote power was calculated the same way, etc. # Context around the situation RPIP-4 defines who gets to vote: `To be eligible for vote participation, the RPL must be effectively staked in the Rocket Pool protocol as reported by getNodeEffectiveRPLStake().` This is currently interpreted by people multiple ways, including at least: - It was meant to be effective stake (10-150%); the function was not there as a definition, but as an implementation that was bugged. Fixing the bugged function (and vote weight) was proper. - Effective stake is defined in the RPIP using the function at the time. Fixing the bugged function (and vote weight) was inappropriate without pDAO input. - It's ambiguous. Before Atlas, `getNodeEffectiveRPLStake()` counted all RPL below 150%. After Atlas, this function returned 0 if the node had less RPL staked than the value of 10% of borrowed ETH. The voting body *was* changed with Atlas release - whether that was ok depends on where you land above. Since this is about voting, we can't do a single vote to figure out what we want -- the set of people that should vote on that is in question (ie, this is a bootstrap problem). This is why the approach is to vote using both possible voting bodies to determine eligibility moving forward. # Outcomes - If both concurrent votes `(Determine Voting Criteria (RPIP-4) [eligible voters: all nodes]` and `Determine Voting Criteria (RPIP-4) [eligible voters: nodes w/RPL ≥10% borrowed ETH])` have matching results, the RPIP Editors are instructed to clarify RPIP-4 and RPIP-8 per those results - Implementation for [eligible voters: all nodes (commit a967777)](https://github.com/rocket-pool/RPIPs/pull/85) - Implementation for [eligible voters: nodes w/RPL ≥10% borrowed ETH (commit f0be7ac)](https://github.com/rocket-pool/RPIPs/pull/86) - If the votes do not match, or quorum fails on either vote, no action is taken - Other votes will remain blocked until a future successful attempt to determine the voting body # Further context - [Ongoing forum conversation](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/rpip-4-discussion-who-should-vote/2249) - Val suggests a clarification and [polls for overwhelming consensus](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/rpip-4-effective-rpl-10/2068/7) -- it's clear that there's no overwhelming consensus - Patches suggests the concurrent vote path, which enjoyed strong support in the poll - Deep dive: - [Full forum thread](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/rpip-4-effective-rpl-10/2068) that included both of the highlighted posts. Note that the initial topic is slightly different and that incidentally raised this point of ambiguity. - Selected discord discussions: [1](https://discord.com/channels/405159462932971535/405163713063288832/1148270849401565315), [2](https://discord.com/channels/405159462932971535/774497904559783947/1150386963153698898)