Kudos to @Andre & @Christoph (and everyone behind the scene) for the dedication and thoughts they’ve put into creating this governance proposal. I’m really excited to see how our governance framework is taking shape - The timelines outlined for each season, combined with the commitment to continuous improvement are awesome!
I love that there’s the review period specifically for the framework amendment - it’s as if we’re engineering a self-iterating system. And yet, as we all know, there’s always room for a bit of fine-tuning.
I’ve got some questions and thoughts I’d like to share. I believe these ideas could make our processes even clearer, more align with the goal, and, most importantly, more inclusive! Because let’s remember, we’re not just crafting something cool here - we’re piecing together a representation of us all.
Guardians
I feel that it would be great if you could articulate the difference between Delegates and Safe Guardians. My interpretation is that Safe Guardians are akin to what other DAOs term as “recognized delegates”, carrying significant weight as they possess the power to shift proposals into the voting phase. Whereas anyone could be delegates (but not recognized).
That said, I really look forward Guardians V2, also I think it would be helpful to ensure there are checks and balances in place to account for the actions (or inaction) of these guardians. Having like a “accountability checkpoint” for our Guardians and to update their status (whether they’re active or not) would be crucial and i think we incorporate this into our consideration for V2
Governance Cycles
On the topic of governance cycles, I believe we might benefit from a little more agility during our initial phases. Given that we’re embarking on a journey of “governance experimentation”, a 4-5 months cycle might feel a tad long, particularly for our first couple of seasons.
As an alternative, we could adopt a three-sprint cycle approach, with two sprints dedicated to the governance scope and one for review and amendments. This setup would equate to ~3 months or roughly a over a quarter. This could provide us with a bit more agility, allowing us to pivot and adapt as things evolve. Let me know what you think!
Telegram group
I have some thoughts on the Safe Guardian Telegram. I think our goal should be on how we could boost transparency and inclusivity. At the moment, it seems that conversations within this channel are largely restricted to Safe Guardians. To foster a greater sense of openness and collaboration, might we consider making these dialogues accessible to a broader audience? I don’t feel it’s right to have this exclusive chat for only “guaridans”.
Proposal Process
While going through this part, I’ve been curious about the reasoning behind the fixed 60,000 SAFE token requirement for signaling approval. Wouldn’t it be more adaptable and future-proof to link this requirement to a percentage of the SAFE votable supply, rather than a fixed amount? With a percentage-based threshold, our process could better reflect the evolving stakeholders and remain flexible over time. It would also promote the guardians and delegates even more to work towards contributing to safe ecosystem for voting power if they want to keep this privilege.
Additionally, it would be valuable to know how many Guardians and Delegates currently have voting power over the proposed threshold. This information would help us gauge the potential influence spread within our governance process.
Voting Power
This raises an interesting question - what is the current votable supply for SafeDAO? I know we had some data on voting power dynamics, but that’s almost a year old now.
Given all the changes and developments, especially the grants program and the upcoming wave of SGPs, I suspect the landscape has shifted quite a bit. I’m planning to dive deeper into these numbers to create an updated picture, and I’d appreciate any insights from others who have been keeping track.
Minor clarification
I’d like clarification. Does this include only holders, or does it also extend to Delegates and Guardians with voting power above this threshold?
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and continuing our collective effort to refine and improve our governance framework.