Improving/simplifying our current Governance Process.
Making our Governance Process more clear for anyone who wants to submit a CP and remove ambiguity from the process.
Back in October, the GCG proposed the first version of our Governance Process that we are using today. Since then, many CPs have been submitted and we have learned a lot about what is working and what can be improved.
The GCG wants to propose the following changes to our Governance Process.
You can see the full proposal with a more detailed description of the changes and their implications here.
Keep the minimum time for 7 days but add that we strongly encourage 14 days or more.
Keep the time as 15 days but count from when the OpenSquare snapshots ends and apply a cooling-off period for on-chain proposals as well.
One CP = one Forum post. The first post generally created is the RFC and it should be updated whenever the proposal passes through the stages (i.e. when it moves forward to off-chain voting, on-chain voting and the outcome of these etc.). We also propose to utilise tags in the titles to indicate what phase a proposal is in.
OpenSquare snapshots are optional if a proposal is followed by an on-chain vote straight after.
All proposals that are ready to proceed get batched on OpenSquare the 1st and 3rd Mondays of the month. However, if there are time sensitive/urgent proposals, we have the option to start the off-chain vote anytime.
Re-introduce a quorum for OpenSquare snapshots of 4M CFG (currently ~1% of total supply).
Add the option “Abstain” to the OpenSquare Snapshots, in addition to “Yes” and “No”. Votes for “Abstain” count towards the quorum.
Add to the governance process that in case there are two mutually exclusive proposals running simultaneously in an OpenSquare snapshot, it will be the one with most “Yes” votes (in terms of CFG), that will be the one that moves forward/passes.
Allow fixing typos and information that is obviously wrong after a proposal has passed. The procedure would be to just go ahead and correct the mistakes, and then announce the change(s) in the forum post for that proposal so people can object to it if they think the change(s) will alter the original proposal. The GCG is responsible for maintaining the Proposal Repository on GitHub so any changes would need to go through GCG.
Add to the templates of RFCs which other CPs they modify/impact.
We have expanded on the definition of what a mandate is and when it is required.
Create a default process for how a facilitator is selected or changed and redefine CP1.1 to be used for this process.
Rename the proposal types (CP1, CP2, CP3, CP4 etc.) to Components and allow CPs to implement/use multiple components in the same proposal. Remove the abbreviation of the proposal types/components in the title of a CP (e.g. GI, MR, RU etc.) as it will look messy if more are included in the same CP.
Add to the documentation that the POP only applies to pools launching on Centrifuge Chain (not Tinlake) and replace OpenSquare Snapshot with on-chain voting(also change the visual for the flow of the onboarding process so it reflects this) in Stage 3.
Add the flowchart below to our documentation.
The changes proposed above will modify the following CPs:
This proposal, if passed, will improve many aspects of our governance.
Better Flow of our Governance
- Batching proposals on OpenSquare makes it more clear when proposals will be up for an off-chain vote and this could also help us avoid voting fatigue
Better Quality of Proposals
- Making the requirements more clear for when a proposal is needed and what information to include will lead to higher quality proposals
Better Structure of our Forum
- By reducing the forum posts to 1 for each CP, and modifying the structure, the forum will be less clogged, more intuitive to navigate in and proposals will be easier to find and their progress easier to track
Having a robust, clear and decentralised governance process is crucial in our path towards our mission! It is one of the key pillars and improving it is an on-going process.
After this RFC has been open for input and discussion for minimum 7 days, it will be submitted to the Centrifuge Proposal Repository on GitHub and an OpenSquare snapshot vote will be created (only off-chain voting, no on-chain voting is required for this proposal).
If the proposal passes on OpenSquare, the changes will applied, effective immediately, and the relevant documentation will be updated.