In light of the recent controversies due to confusions over the governance process, I’d like to propose some governance guideline practices to ensure that future governance votes would proceed in an orderly manner that is satisfactory to everyone.
The TRIBE DAO currently has no official guidelines, but there have been some long standing practices observed by the community. This proposal is meant to aggregate and codify the best of such practices and it is meant to serve as a reference for the future combined TRIBE DAO as well. These draft measures, if approved, are meant to serve as “official governance guidelines” rather than “written laws” for the future operation of the DAO.
- All forum proposals should engage in a 48 hour last call before proceeding to snapshot. The last call should be announced in the original forum post and discord governance channel for publicity; enlisting the aid of a mod if need be.
- A notable exception would be technical rollouts, or routine contract upgrades such as FIP-48, which can be forwarded straight to On-Chain voting/OA timelock if there are no dissensions. Other measures which are already approved in principle by a DAO vote such as individual LaaS funding, can be allowed to move forward directly to OA/snapshot.
- During the “Last Call”, each FIP should clearly state what every voting option would be. The last call post should also indicate any edits which have been made from the original due to the discussions in the forum.
- An exception can be carved out for proposals that see no dissensions or edits from the original document. In which case the last call is simply a 48 hour countdown announcement. Though if edits do occur due to comments made after the last call, they should also be indicated by the author.
Only the author(s) of the original forum discussion post should make the snapshot for that particular motion, or allow somebody else to do so with explicit written permission in that original thread.
Forum proposals should refrain from self-assigning FIP numbers, the FIP number should be serialized according to the time when the snapshot is posted. After a FIP receives a serial number, it may create an appropriate channel for discussion in discord.
Upon the passing of a snapshot vote, the poster should announce in their original discourse post, or on discord governance, the hour (with time zone) and date they intend to forward the proposal for on-chain voting/Optimistic Approval. The minimum time between snapshot passing and on-chain vote should be at least 72 hours. If a particular snapshot is a “temperature check” and not meant to be executed directly, it should be clearly indicated by its authors.
- Routine protocol upgrades can be exempt from these requirements.
If a proposal outright fails, the author should indicate whether they intend to repost the FIP after editing its contents with community input. A failed FIP should go through the entire process of a new FIP, including another last call, etc. To avoid malicious manipulation of voting patterns and voter fatigue, a failed FIP should not be reposted in its original form for at least two weeks.
If a proposal passes, but the authors feel that an edit to its contents are merited before proceeding with onchain voting/OA; the authors should clearly indicate so as soon as possible. The authors should clearly outline every edit from the proposal that has passed the snapshot. This is particularly relevant for the Fei-Rari merge snapshot, and I encourage the community to comment on needed changes for the Fei-Rari merges.
Please discuss and scrutinize these governance measures that are meant to regulate and streamline the governance process!
If successfully passed on snapshot, these guidelines would be pinned on the discourse forum and written into the snapshot website for Fei. They would serve as official guidelines for the governance process.
Proposals that blatant disregards these guidelines after its authors have been notified as such by community members, should not be eligible for OA approval; Snapshot Admins can also elect to take down those proposals outright on grounds of breech of procedure if they deem the situation to be malicious.