Just one game-theoretical consideration here.
Voting AGAINST the updates @Sawyer is producing signals that the voter is against the new parameters first and foremost. If I read your posts correctly, and please feel free to push back here, you want to change the cadence and introduce new reporting requirements.
To do so, the best way would be to submit an RFC, that basically copies the original RevShare RFC (which you support) but add clarification on cadence and reporting duties.
OR to abstain from voting as this reduces the overall legitimacy of the polls (less turnout), signals governance fatigue, and reduces the chances of these polls meeting quorum and passing.
Of course you’re more than welcome to vote AGAINST to express your direct opposition to the ongoing process, especially since it is coupled with excellent communication of your rationale here on the forum. This reply is meant to help to think through the options here.