That’s it. Now publish the proposal just as you would normally do it.
Here are basic explanations for what the codes do:
It enables global transferability by calling the unpause() function on the Safe token contract. Until that, only the SafeDAO Safe was allowed to transfer Safe tokens.
Due to the fact, that the right of token transfer was limited to the SafeDAO Safe, user and ecosystem airdrop contracts were implemented as modules enabled on the SafeDAO Safe. Once global transferability is enabled, this is not required anymore. The allocation contracts can just be used directly. Removing not required modules from the SafeDAO Safe is just basic security hygiene.
On a more technical level, this means the following 3 actions to be executed:
Remove the module facilitating the user allocation (0xA0b937D5c8E32a80E3a8ed4227CD020221544ee6)
Remove the module facilitating the ecosystem allocation (0x29067F28306419923BCfF96E37F95E0f58ABdBBe)
Call the unpause() function on the Safe token contract.
Note: This does not disable the claiming process or affect the ongoing allocation claiming in any way. The claiming can now be done just directly via the respective contracts.
Hi, first of all, I’d like to apologize to everyone who messaged me in the last two weeks and didn’t get a reply, as I’ve been hit pretty hard by Covid and had to ruthlessly prioritize who I reply to – at the end of the day, my recovery came before everything else and I didn’t always have the energy to communicate with those who’ve reached out to me via all kinds of channels.
As some of you may have seen, I changed the proposal a little bit a few days ago to make it clear that the SafeSnap module should be used. I would like to thank @Arseny and @0xAA for the great input on this.
I’m also glad to see that there was a lot of discussion in the time I was away, because the intention behind this proposal was always to engage the community.
And I’m looking forward to seeing the voting process begin tomorrow. This is a key moment as now the SAFE token’s transferability or non-transferability (depending on the outcome of the vote) gets its legitimacy from all of us voting.
Maybe this proposal will go through, maybe we will have to revisit unpausing the token contract in a few months. In the end, no matter how the vote goes, it is a victory for the autonomy of SafeDAO.
So sorry to hear Daniel, wishing you a full recovery very soon!
Thank you for being so engaged in our community, even despite your recent and presumably still ongoing process with Covid! The quality and attention to detail in this proposal clearly resonated with a lot of community members.
The last days also demonstrated how well this community can work together, discussing a proposal and coordinating next steps even in your absence. That was an interesting and useful test, if you will. I wonder how we can improve the design our governance process here, keen to hear anyone’s thoughts (in a separate thread) or even organise a retro call!
One more thing … for the sake of being able to use the SafeSnap module and to avoid ambiguous results, I back off from my previous stance that we should have 3 voting options (immmediate unpausing, unpausing after claim period, make no changes/decide later) and I recommend limiting ourselves to two options:
While the constitution is of course quite high-level and this proposal at hand quite specific, they do relate to another. May be worth reviewing the constitution proposal before making up your mind about the upcoming vote on this SEP-2.
If your question is whether SEP-2 and the constitution proposal are separate proposals, then yes, absolutely!
They are being discussed independently and neither of them are currently approved by a DAO vote. SEP-2 seems to be much closer to that (currently in late phase 1) while the constitution proposal has just been put up for discussion (phase 0) and is not even an official SEP yet.
Strictly speaking, the constitution would arguably only apply to proposals and other activities happening from the time of when it passes a Snapshot vote, not retrospectively. Although practically speaking, we’d probably want to make sure that any SEP that passes before the constitution does is already aligned to avoid contradictions in the future.
Can we Just have someone post a proposal with the safesnap plugin vote this in and run a quick vote seeing as though this was already approved?
What was the point of the snapshot if it wasn’t in there in the first place?
I don’t get it it already passed so can we just put it live? I doubt the team doesn’t have the ability to do that no one would entirely trust that feature to the community alone. So can someone from the team either just flip the switch seeing as though it passed. In lieu just run another vote rn with the safesnap plugin enabled. And turn it live rn. Am I wrong thats literally what the “DAO” just voted on. And it passed so… Either respect the governance or rerun the vote with the features enabled.
Anyone with enough tokens can do it. I have a few safes so… i think im just a bit below threshold on individual tokens in each safe or i would do it.
Let’s hold each other accountable to ensure that the dates proposed are met. This should be uploaded to snapshot as promised on Wednesday, Nov 2nd. If there are continued delays from the minority that have the ability to bring this to a vote, that is concerning. Regardless of the motivation, it has already made the majority DAO participants below the proposal threshold feel that their participation does not have any consequence. If a minority has the exclusive ability to pick the candidates, then the outcome of the election will always favor the interests of that minority. See “Tweedism” in American politics.
To be clear, the governance process says it can be uploaded from today — not that it must necessarily be uploaded today. Although you’re right of course that it’s expected to happen anytime now. Is anyone already on it?
Anyone with at least 20k SAFE in their wallet can upload the proposal to Snapshot. This is not limited to the proposal author, @Daniel, but asking if he’s already on it would make sense of course. In principle, you can certainly upload it!
For various reasons, mainly because SafeDAO should empower all stakeholders of its DAO, not just the team behind Safe. Since the team has been working on Safe as a product for many years already, the team has an unfair advantage in terms of know-how on the product and its ecosystem, if you will. SafeDAO’s governance process puts a counter-weight to that and prioritises decentralised governance from the start.
Also, @Daniel as the proposal author has a say (and did just comment as I’m writing this ).
For Daniel’s convenience and for the rest of our DAO, I have decided to upload this proposal to Snapshot. I pointed out that the author of the proposal was Daniel, and only just speeded up the process.
I ask all DAO members to vote! Together - we are force !