RFC: Founding Documents of the Centrifuge DAO

Centrifuge Governance Proposals
, , ,
1

Founding Documents are equivalent to a constitution; a binding agreement between members that alongside the Centrifuge Proposal Framework work as the foundations of our DAO.

Key to the Founding Documents is the Shared Mission, a fixed destination that everyone can navigate towards even while there is significant change around us, a set of principles for how we work, a Code of Conduct, and roles, rights and obligations of members.

Proposal type: CP-4
Authors: Governance and Coordination Group (@ImdioR & @Rhano)
Contributors: @Kate_Bee, @lucasvo, @akhan & @Davidutro
Technical/non-technical proposal: non-technical proposal
Date proposed: 2023-01-27

Short Summary

Proposal for the Founding Documents of the Centrifuge DAO.

High Level Objective

Achieve agreement by members of the DAO to operate and act according to the Founding Documents and build Centrifuge towards the Shared Mission detailed below.

Background

Since the first DAO was created back in May 2016, countless DAOs have surfaced. A common problem is a lack of clear agreed-upon guidelines for which direction to go collectively and how to get there. We want to avoid making the same mistake, ensuring Centrifuge DAO can thrive.

Centrifuge DAO is still at a very early stage. We believe it is fundamental to define and agree upon

  • What we want to achieve and work towards
  • How we work together
  • What the roles are and ways to engage for contributors
  • How we interact with each other and what happens if our agreements are broken

This proposal is based on the feedback received in the discussion of the Founding Documents here and here, combined with in depth research as well as discovery interviews with DAO members.

Detailed Description

We propose that The Founding Documents consist of four parts: Shared Mission, DAO Principles, Levels of Engagement and Code of Conduct, and that DAO members adhere to them. The Documents are detailed below.

Founding Document Part One: The Shared Mission

Full description here

Founding Document Part Two: DAO Principles

Full description here

Founding Document Part Three: Levels of Engagement

Full description here

Founding Document Part Four: Code of Conduct

Full description here

Change or Improvement

This proposal improves the experience of DAO members and sets a strong foundation to coordinate well to achieve product-market fit, and the mission.

Aligment to the Mission of the Centrifuge DAO

One of the goals of this RFC is to clearly define the mission of Centrifuge.

This RFC will be open for minimum 14 days before proceeding to an OpenSquare Snapshot.

Please share your feedback in the comments below. This proposal, if passed, will lay the foundation for the future of the Centrifuge DAO so everyone’s input is appreciated.

15 Likes
2

Great job @Rhano, I really like the overall description of the Centrifuge as a DAO and it is written well!
Two small questions:
(1) about the Daily Contributors and “Active Contributors”. In the description, the Active Contributors can call them “Core Contributors”, but it seems the “Daily contributors” made more contributions, so I am a little bit confused here. Maybe it is just me, but I feel it is a little bit difficult to distinguish the “daily contributors” and “active contributors”, do you think that it is better to use “Core contributors”, to replace “Daily contributors”.
(2). For the description of " Passive Contributors", I feel it might be better to write some more details about token holders. For example, they can use the tokens to vote on the proposals, pay transaction fees, invest in the tinlake pool, or even staking in the future.

Some minor typos that I found:

  1. " Reduction of unnecessary steps make it easier", should use “makes”
  2. " See Appendix 2 for the process for Conflict Resolution", use “the process of”
  3. In the document, you mentioned “Coc” in As a consequence of violating the CoC, but didn’t explain what is “Coc”, you may have an explanation later on in the document, but I recommend that you should explain it the first time in the document.
4 Likes
3

Amazing work @Rhano @ImdioR

Looking forward to see DAO tackle the challenges of Real Word DeFi with reinforced power!

5 Likes
4

Thank you for your feedback @DrCAO!

Yes, you got it right, Daily Contributors contribute more regularly (i.e typically full time) and both Daily and Active Contributors are considered Core Contributors. But maybe there are better ways to categorise them - do you have a good suggestion for what to call Daily, Active and Passive Contributors?

We are not defining what token holders can do with their tokens, but what their privileges are in the DAO. It already says they can participate in governance (e.g. vote on proposals).

Corrected, thanks!

It should already be defined in the very beginning of the section of the Code of Conduct.

image
image914Ă—170 13.8 KB

1 Like
5

Thanks for putting all four parts of the founding documents together in one post. Regarding Part III of the docs “Levels of engagement” I personally find that one of the biggest challenges for us daily and core contributors is the question “How to engage passive contributors to contribute more to the Centrifuge DAO” and maybe to move up in the “hierarchy” to become core/daily contributors?

This leads to my second thought: changing the levels of engagement: I believe that regular activity is needed but how do you want to measure the inactivity of 90 days? Should this be done via regular checks or just on request?

2 Likes
6

Thanks for jumping in @Tjure07! Regarding your first question:

I do agree that this is important and I would like to see Passive Contributors getting more involved (but quality over quantity). However, I personally think it is outside the scope of this proposal (Founding Documents) to suggest how to address this. It would be better suited as a topic in a Community/Governance Call, in my opinion.

And your second question:

If a DAO member changes their level of engagement from Passive to Active, the main change is the invitation to the DAO Slack. Given this, measuring (in)activity there would be an appropriate measurement, in my opinion. But since there are many ways someone can be active (contributing to building the protocol, discussions here on the Forum etc.) we can probably clarify this even further. What do you think would be a good way to approach this?

1 Like
7

Good day Yarosl6 :wave:
Thank you for your feedback.

2 Likes
8

Read it and these are great Founding documents, no comments.

I do have a question about where will these documents live and how do users get to know about our Shared mission?

5 Likes
9

Good day Ilhan
Thank you for your feedback.

These documents will be uploaded on Github. You can find all proposals here.

And if this proposal will pass Opensquare snapshot vote the Shared Mission will be uploaded on GitHub and, in my opinion, probably will be uploaded on the official Centrifuge website too.

1 Like
10

Absolutely agree, I just wanted to mention it but it is unrelated to the founding docs.

I don’t have much experience with Slack so far so I can’t given an appropriate answer how to measure the activity there but as it is one of the main tool for core contributors it seems to be crucial. What I can say for sure that the activity/inactivity in the forum can be measured quite easily (last login, posts read, minutes spent).
I have the opinion that combined measurements are important because as you said there are several ways to contribute and to be active. As mentioned in the founding docs, do you agree to track the activity status on request?

11

Thank you very much for your detailed response! @Rhano I don’t have any other questions :slight_smile:

For the daily, active, and passive contributors, I am just having a feeling that the core contributor is usually those with the most contributions if you want to distinguish them from other contributors. One idea I can think about: Passive, Silver and Gold contributors, or CFG core contributors, CFG core contributor candidate, passive contributor, but it is not a big issue if everyone else understands the difference between daily and active contributors. By the way, for those different contributors, I would recommend that we can give them a special role on discord (or maybe you already describe it somewhere?)

12

Hello DrCao
Thank you for your comment and feedback.
This is interesting and i think we can do this!

13

This is a great shout, I think the marketing team should take note that this is a good opportunity for us to make sure people are aware (including our own community) of this stuff. @devin @rohanh

4 Likes
14

Great work :+1::pray: let’s support.

I Would love to see more energy put in motivating the community for action in a playful way (such as, missions crew3/galexy/etc). education missions, supporting on social media, using the products and apps in ecosystem and Vote for proposals…

I think it needs to come with improving the connection to community (all must be on Twitter, I would go back to interactive telegram)…

3 Likes
15

Thank you Lolalot for your comment.
Just now we have a galaxy mission for the Chinese community, but in the future, we will definitely expand this to all Community members.

What about the active users. In Founding Document Part Three: Levels of Engagement we described different levels with different engagement. If you will become an active contributor and will get access and direct contact with others team members, expert,s and advisors.

image

People are involved in Centrifuge for various reasons, with different ambitions, interests, and levels of engagement. Some actively participate in all aspects of governance (discussion and voting), some only in certain parts of the project and others don’t actively participate at all. In order to keep our discussions constructive and productive, and to engage people on relevant matters who have relevant expertise, we propose these levels of engagement.

Active Contributors:
These are people/entities who actively contribute to the Centrifuge protocol and/or DAO. These contributors engage in forum discussions, governance calls, token voting, pool launches, integrations, and Centrifuge promotions. Examples include:

  • Asset Originators
  • Ambassadors
  • VCs
  • Protocol and DeFi partners
  • Collators
  • Group members

Changing Levels of Engagement

It is possible for a DAO member to move levels - both up and down. Any contributor can increase their access if they start contributing regularly in a meaningful way to the DAO, via governance, forum discussions, call participation, or by being part of a project that contributes to the protocol.

So if Founding Documents will be accepted by the Community we can active these levels and anyone who will contribute on the regular basis could become Active.

4 Likes
16

Hi CFG Community & Developers of the Founding Doc,

This is my first time I am personally interested to be involved in a DAO from its inception. Congrats to the paper!

May I start with the first question to see where other DAOs have been failing as you mentioned and where we differ? At the end of the day, it is about people and its quality. And the good thing is that CFG has an amazing business in which I’ve been participating since 2020.

Regarding the different levels of engagement. Quantity is not quality but it must be difficult to “juggle” a good compromise. Some people can do much more with one phone call than others “trying” to show engagement; hopefully not with “gm-messages” :wink:

But it is important that community grows and I think we should put lots of emphasis in education and to develop an educational concept which should be integrated somehow as a crucial part in the Founding Document.

Have a great day!

4 Likes
17

Could you add to VCs also consultants? Some of us have good industry contacts and could advise companies. Does it make sense?

3 Likes
18

Good day PathrockNetwork
Thank you for your feedback.

image
image869Ă—331 9.33 KB

In Active Contributors, VCs are already included. What about consultants. I think this is a good idea.
I think we should collect more feedback about this.
But if “consultants” or anyone else contribute on regular basis they of course could be invited.

Thank you for sharing this info. This is very interesting. Maybe our Bizdev Team can reach out to you? What do you think?

1 Like
19

Thank you Pathrock for your feedback.

Some people can do much more with one phone call than others “trying” to show engagement;

I agree completely with you.

hopefully not with “gm-messages” :wink:

:+1:

20

Sure, any time. Happy to help.

1 Like