Title:
[Draft] OBRA Budget Amendments Season 2, Sprint 4
Authors:
Andre Geest (Safe, @Andre), Amy (Safe, @amy.sg)
Created:
2014-05-20
Abstract
This proposal extends the soft launch provisions in the governance framework and Outcomes-Based Resource Allocation framework (OBRA). These provisions allow the Foundation to deviate from governance cycles if needed, which gives SafeDAO the possibility to vote in a flexible manner on certain topics while still keeping the general structure. Specifically, this allows:
- Amendments to the governance framework to be proposed and voted on in any sprint of the season, not just sprint 4.
- Amendments to OBRA framework, OBRA strategies and budget to be proposed and voted on any sprint of the season, not just sprint 4.
- Propose and vote on non-governance proposals in Sprint 4 if needed.
Proposal types
State which proposal type this proposal belongs to.
SEP: Constitutional Proposals
SEP: Governance Proposals
Other SEPs
Proposal details
Purpose and Background
Background
The following topics are currently available for amendments in Sprint 4/Governance specific proposals:
- Governance framework (i.e. changes to scope of governance, voting process and mechanism, governance cycle)
- OBRA budget (creating a new budget or changing existing budget)
- OBRA strategies (changing existing or adding new strategies)
- OBRA initiative reviews (proposing to stop funding an existing OBRA initiative)
- OBRA framework (changes to purpose, submission requirements, review/voting process, payout procedures)
Additionally, in the current governance framework, there are 4 Sprints in a Season, but amendments to the governance framework and OBRA framework are only possible in the 4th sprint.
The intention behind this is to reduce noise and hone attention onto governance proposals. However, since its implementation, SafeDAO has actively worked with these frameworks and it is to be expected that certain amendments need flexibility to be proposed in Sprint 1-3 and not just in Sprint 4.
Therefore in order to maintain agility at this stage of the DAO, we propose to extend the soft launch provision for governance framework and OBRA for Season 3.
Changes to the Governance Framework
| Original | New |
|---|---|
| H. Annex 1: Season 1 and 2 | H. Annex 1: Season 1, 2 and 3 |
| For Season 1 and 2, the governance framework will operate under a soft launch protocol. Recognizing the need for flexibility during the formative phase of SafeDAO, the Foundation retains the prerogative to deviate from the processes laid out in D.II. Governance cycles and E.II. Proposal and voting sprints if necessary to ensure an efficient decision-making process. Any deviations will be communicated transparently and are subject to review in the review and governance amendment sprint. This exception is limited to Season 1 and is introduced to allow a smoother transition into the new governance framework. | For Season 1, 2 and 3, the governance framework will operate under a soft launch protocol. Recognizing the need for flexibility during the formative phase of SafeDAO, the Foundation retains the prerogative to deviate from the processes laid out in D.II. Governance cycles and E.II. Proposal and voting sprints if necessary to ensure an efficient decision-making process. Any deviations will be communicated transparently and are subject to review in the review and governance amendment sprint. This exception is limited to the respective seasons and is introduced to allow a smoother transition into the new governance framework. |
Changes to OBRA
| Original | New |
|---|---|
| G. Soft launch | G. Soft launch* |
| This exception is limited to Season 1 and 2, introduced to allow a smoother transition into the new resource allocation framework. | For Season 1, 2 and 3, the resource allocation framework will operate under a soft launch protocol. Recognizing the need for flexibility during the formative phase of SafeDAO, the Foundation retains the prerogative to deviate from the payout procedure laid out in B.III. Initiatives and C. Submission and review cycles if necessary to ensure an efficient resource allocation process. Any deviations will be communicated transparently and are subject to review in the review and governance amendment sprint. This exception is limited to the respective seasons and is introduced to allow a smoother transition into the new resource allocation framework. |
Effects and Impact Analysis
Changes can introduce the following risks:
-
Scenario 1: There are too many governance proposals which dilute the attention of governance participants.
Mitigation: The soft launch provision keeps the general structure of the governance cycles and only exceptionally deviates from it. This allows a balanced approach. -
Scenario 2: The Foundation continues to hold the power to deviate from procedures.
Mitigation: There is a transparent review process in Sprint 4.
Alternative Solutions
We considered a few alternatives:
-
Option 1: Removing the Sprint 4 governance limitation, but introducing a different threshold for proposal amendments (increased quorum, voting, etc).
This option could be possible in the future as SafeDAO already has proposal types implemented. However, varying degrees of voting systems feels premature at this stage and needs technical amendments to the voting system to enforce these. -
Option 2: Removing voting cycle permanently.
This option might be a future outcome if we realize that the governance cycles are not needed. Currently, the soft launch provisions balance out the pre-determined structure and needed flexibility. -
Option 3: Delay. Extending Season 3, Sprint 1 as governance amendment sprint with no OBRA proposals or being parallel.
This option would be a short term solution that requires the DAO to go through another vote in the next sprint to make necessary adjustments. -
Option 4: No changes.
Without soft launch provision, governance changes would need to wait until Sprint 4. Depending on the urgency, this could have adversarial effects where the process turns into a burden.
Implementation
Does the implementation of the proposal require new code? How is the security of the code ensured? How is the implementation of the proposal carried out?
Own implementation possible
Own implementation but with funding (how much % to implementation)
Request for technical support through Safe matter experts:
Open Questions
Anything that needs to be cleared up before the community can make an informed decision?
Copyright
Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.
