[Draft] [OBRA: Increase governance participation] Improve voting UI/UX with SAFE on mobile

  1. Initiative title: Improve voting UI/UX with SAFE on mobile
  1. Abstract: Provide a brief summary of your initiative

In most governance systems, voters elect to place their governance tokens in a SAFE. This is especially true for delegates who sit across multiple governance projects.

Regardless of the underlying governance system (Snapshot, Agora, Tally, OZ Governor) collecting these signatures is a well known time sink and has been further evidenced in our ongoing user research.

  1. Aligned strategy: Which pre-approved strategy is this initiative driving forward?

[Strategy 5] Increase governance participation

  1. Funding request: What resources are being requested from SafeDAO in USDC?
  • ~5-8k design UX sprint (1-2week)
  • ~10-15k implementation (4-6 weeks)
  • ~5k testing and iteration (1-2 weeks)

Total request (Lower Bound): 20k
Total request (Upper Bound): 28k — Ideally

However, any grant amount between these ranges would be sufficient.

  1. If applicable, upfront funding: Indicate if upfront funding is needed. Refer to 'Payout’ under Get funding from SafeDAO for lump sum payment options.


  1. Relation to budget: State the requested funding as a percentage of the total initiative budget (e.g. if you ask for 50k for Strategy 1: 25%)


  1. Metrics and KPIs: Which metrics and KPIs will the initiative be measured against?
  • Lead time from Proposal → Cancellation/Execution

    • Eg. It may take 15 hrs to collect and execute a transaction

    • Our system may reduce that time to 1-2 hrs.

  • It would be great to get current stats on this from the SAFE team so we can benchmark impact over time.

  1. Initiative description: What is the initiative about?

By making SAFEs easier to use from a native mobile interface. We promote stronger security models. For standard SAFE/s (3/5, 5/7, etc) this dramatically increases the possibility of a signer, being aware they need to act on a transaction.

We propose to leverage the SAFE SDKs to expedite proposing, collecting and executing transactions within the governance domain.

This will be delivered via our flagship product https://lighthouse.cx which is live and available on both (iOS/Android)-

This is also an R&D experiment in designing how to collect signatures on mobile devices.

Example flow:
* A new Proposal is submitted on-chain from Optimism.
* All recipients following Optimism will be notified
* Any voter on the SAFE may propose their choice (eg. 3/5)
* Other 4 signers may choose to sign
* After x mins/hours (configurable) a reminder is sent to sign to non-signers
* Based on thresholds, execute/reject txn can be committed.

Potential tailwinds

This eventually could also extend to treasury execution, we are working with Metagov to explore how we can index treasuries with DAO spaces.

  1. Current status: Does the offering (product/service) already exist or is the funding used to create it?
  • Our product Lighthouse already exists on both (iOS/Android)

  • Many of our users are requesting SAFE support however we do not have the funds currently to build out this initiative.

  1. Risks: What risks does the initiative entail?
  • Our application relies heavily on wallet connect at the moment (as do most apps)

  • We still need to add Ledger support and other wallets.-

    • This is a known unknown and will require iteration.
  • This will be a brand new UI/UX experience never done before, so it will require some iteration. However we are confident in delivering an MVP that is usable.

  1. Timeline and milestones: Provide a detailed timeline or roadmap, include key milestones
  • Design UX sprint (1-2 weeks)

  • UX, Messaging and Prototyping

  • Implementation (4-6 weeks)

    • Vote using SAFE in app with snapshot based DAOs
    • Vote using SAFE in app with 1-2 Governor based DAOs (eg. Optimism, Nouns)
  • Testing and iteration (1-2 weeks)

    • Community feedback and polishing where possible
  1. Initiative lead: Who is the accountable initiative lead? (individual or organization)

Arnold Almeida, Founder, CTO - https://lighthouse.cx

  1. Team: How many individuals in total will be working on this initiative and what role do they have? Please provide a brief background of the team members, highlighting their relevant experience and expertise
  1. Additional support/resources: Are there any resources (non-financial) requested from the Safe Ecosystem Foundation or the core contributors?
  • I don’t believe so. We will be for the most part leveraging SAFE SDK’s
  • We may request SDK enhancements though our discovery phase.
  • We may request validation from the SAFE team to field test our UX
  • Explore Indexing options available to us
  • Improving SDKs if necessary
  1. Implementation dependencies: Does the implementation of this initiative require any prior changes in the current governance processes, e.g., updates to the governance framework, or have any other dependency? If yes, please specify these. Note that the funding of the initiative will be dependent on the approval and (if needed) successful implementation of such necessary governance modifications or any other dependency.

No, This would be a value-added addition to voting systems.

Google Doc here — [Draft/Discussion] [OBRA] Improve voting UI/UX with SAFE on mobile - Arnold Almeida - Google Docs


  1. Clarified grant request calculation to use upper bound of 28k USDC
1 Like

Thanks for taking the time to write your proposal!

Please note some important deadlines in the timeline for this sprint. It officially starts today, July 8th and you have until Monday, July 22nd at 23:59 UTC to get signal from at least 3 delegates/guardians with cumulative voting power of 60K / total from all three (details outlined in our governance hub and as exemplified here).

Additionally, if you intend to move this proposal to Phase 1, we usually have Phase 1 proposals present at the Governance call which is next Wednesday, July 17th at 16:00 UTC. Can you make it? If so, please DM me your email on Discourse or Discord (@amy_safe).

Thanks for the information @amy.sg is there generally a protocol for contacting delegates/guardians to have them read prop?

Seems like its very dependant on them considering the proposal in time.
5.6% Active, seems a bit risky. 66 active / (151 inactive+1017 ghost)

EDIT: Was looking at the overall tab. The delegate tab is a stepwise better!
23.8% Active = 45/(57+132)*100

Another potential area for optimisation!

RE: Wednesday, July 17th at 16:00 UTC. Happy to make that call, will send details on Discord.

Thank you for your help.


I tagged all the active delegates on Twitter to get some visibility. :see_no_evil:

1 Like

Hey @1a35e1,
I’d like to signal that this is ready for a vote, but there are a couple points that aren’t well defined that I’d like you to clarify before I indicate this is ready to move to a vote.

You provide some ranges here, but what is the total request? I would need to know the total USDC amount you’re requesting to signal that this is ready to move forward.

You indicate it’s 18% of the total budget for Strategy 5, which would imply you’re asking for 27,000 USDC, but if I add up the top end of your ranges, I’m getting 28,000 USDC. I don’t want to make any assumptions, so I’ll ask that you clarify this before I can signal that this proposal is ready for a vote.

If the goal is to increase governance participation, there should be a metric included above the number of people participating in Safe governance. If the UI/UX is improved, I would assume it would reduce friction for users and increase participation.

You could look at the participation rate in past Snapshot votes and use that as a baseline. Then you can project how your proposal will increase participation rates within Safe governance.

Once I have clarification on these points, I can signal that this proposal is ready for a vote.

Thank you for your points @BraveNewDeFi

I have clarified our intentions for the Funding request section.

Regarding: Metrics and KPIs

I think this is can be measured in two ways.

  1. The core of this proposal is exploring how we can collect and execute transactions on a multisig more effectively. The thesis here is, if a user is notified via push they need to sign, we get to execute/reject a transaction more quickly.

I will need to dig more into seeing what baselines I can establish, as this is applicable to ANY group that votes via a SAFE multisig.

  1. Overall participation in SAFE governance is definitely a KPI. We should ideally expect to see an uplift here.

Thanks for your suggestion for the baseline, will try and get this done, by the community call on Wed.

Given the update, I’ll assume the request for the upper bound since I believe a specific amount is required for a Snapshot proposal.

I am a Safe Guardian with sufficient voting power , and I believe this proposal is ready to move to a Snapshot vote.

1 Like

Hi @BraveNewDeFi.

I started writing some code but then found this which should be sufficient for now. https://safedao.curiahub.xyz/participation

I would also note that governance uplift will also require help/promotion from the DAO so I would evaluate that over a longer timeframe.

Secondly there is a parameters when voting that indicates which client submitted the vote. So we would also be able to use that as a core metric.

That combined with the number of users Following the SAFE DAO on lighthouse should hopfully prove a good starting point.

Thanks for the opportunity to present on the call. Here is a link to a quick DEMO that showcases our platform E2E.

To recap;

  • Goal of this prop is to improve UI/UX when making SAFE interactions on native mobile apps.
  • The native app is already live and SAFE DAO is already listed. Please make sure you only download from our website.
  • Feel free to email me thoughts/feedback/questions anything really!
1 Like

Can you tell me a bit more about how you are driving awareness and user growth to join Lighthouse?

Also can you provide some stats on current utilization related to lighthouse and other communities?

Can you tell me a bit more about how you are driving awareness and user growth to join Lighthouse?

Thanks for the question, we are currently focusing on the product and responding to the needs based on interviews and user research with (governance) leaders from various communities.

Our current cohort being gov leads and delegates who have expressed pain points like so:

Awareness is important but we are currently resource bound. That said, we are slowly making ourselves known in popular communities via the grants process and learning from communities

- Optimism
- Metagov

eg. Jesse from base on our recent prop.

We have also focused on using farcaster as a tool to drive awareness and engagement though our frames support.

Currently we have:

- Space frames (eg. SAFE DAO)
- Proposal frames
- Comment frames

If SAFE DAO would like, we can also auto-post new proposal’s to the official farcaster channel, but we are still working out some bits.

You can also check our channel for iterations we drop in public.

We also have a few more initiatives we have planned but are not ready to talk about yet.

Also can you provide some stats on current utilization related to lighthouse and other communities?

TBH we are still to early to provide anything statistically significant.

However in the 90D we have been live, for the funnel.

- Has opened the app again and has read a proposal, this is at 77.87%
- Average DAOs followed per user (8.13)

As we give people more features they are desperately are asking for, we are hoping for a lot of organic growth.

Hope this answers your questions and happy to clarify further if needed.