Abstract
This proposal aims to streamline the governance processes of the DAO while ensuring that voting power is judiciously distributed among stakeholders and members.
Motivation
Recent developments have highlighted the necessity of simplifying the governance structure to enable the DAO to operate effectively without the facilitation of Laguna Games. Rather than an imposed change, this proposal should be viewed as a curated list of options that the DAO can mix and match to tailor a governance model that best meets its unique needs and objectives.
Details
I. On General Charter Updates
These are updates that should have been made following the migration to Xai and the transition from core game development to intellectual property development.
- Update all references of RBW to CU, sRBW to sCU, and lsRBW to lsCU.
- Replace mentions of the Polygon blockchain with the Arbitrum or Xai blockchain, as contextually appropriate.
- Change all references from “Game” to “IP.”
II. On Quadratic Voting Strategy
We propose shifting the voting strategy used for all Snapshot votes from a Single Voting Strategy to a Quadratic Voting Strategy. This change may encourage participation from stakeholders with smaller voting power, who might otherwise feel discouraged in a Single Voting framework.
- Implement Quadratic Voting
- Retain Single Choice Voting
III. On Sybil Resistance and Voting
If Quadratic Voting is implemented, it is crucial to discourage potential bad actors from distributing their holdings across multiple wallets. To achieve this, we can establish a minimum voting power threshold for accepting votes on Snapshot, which the DAO can discuss and decide upon.
- 5000
- 10,000
- 15,000
**It is important to note that this measure will not alienate small holders, as Snapshot features a native delegation system that allows holders to pool their votes to meet the minimum requirement.
IV. On Quorum
Reaching quorum has become increasingly challenging for the DAO. While transitioning to Quadratic Voting may address this issue, we invite the DAO to review the current threshold to quorum.
- Remove quorum; all decisions are made by simple majority regardless of participation.
- Lower the quorum from 33% to 20%.
- Lower the quorum from 33% to 10
V. On Supermajority
There has been some discontent surrounding the supermajority clause. Therefore, I propose its removal, ensuring that all members, regardless of their holdings, must navigate the full governance process.
- Retain the supermajority clause
- Remove the supermajority clause
VI. On Abstain
There were a few requests to introduce an Abstain option over the years. I leave it to the DAO to decide whether to implement this option.
- Implement Abstain as a voting option
- Do not implement Abstain as a voting option
VII. On Empowering the Council
Implementing the Proposal Screening Process requires effective coordination and execution.
A. Council Leader
To replace the role of the Governance Facilitator, the Council shall internally elect a Council Leader. The term of the Council Leader concludes at the end of the Council’s term. As per the Membership - Right to Refuse, no Council Leader will be elected without their explicit agreement to serve.
- Council Leader Responsibilities.
- Organize and manage Council Review.
- Oversee the proposal process in accordance with the Proposal Screening Process.
- Publish a report detailing the positions of Council Members.
- Act as a liaison to Core Contributors, representing key issues to stakeholders or inviting relevant stakeholders to ensure informed discussions.
- With the council, coordinate the implementation and execution of approved proposals, ensuring timely deliverables and milestones.
- With the council, request payouts from Safe signers for approved Grant Proposals once deliverables and milestones are confirmed.
- With the council, initiate the election process for the incoming Council one month prior to the end of their term.
- Prepare a turnover document containing essential information for the incoming Council.
B. Council Member Roles
In addition to their existing responsibilities, Council Members will assume two new roles:
- Enforce the Crypto Unicorns Guiding Principle and the Proposal Screening Process.
- Elect a Council Leader responsible for managing Council operations.
On the other hand, I propose removing the requirement for Council Members to provide Preliminary Feedback before voting on proposals:
- Remove: Before voting on any Proposal or meeting regarding such a Proposal, each Council Member shall publicly comment their Preliminary Feedback on the Governance Forum.
C. Council Member Token Compensation
I believe that the councilors will need token compensation given the expansion of their roles. I would like to leave it to the DAO to determine the correct compensation as denominated in flat $CU to be taken from the Ecosystem Fund. This proposal will be updated as per DAO suggestions.
VIII. On Streamlining Council Operations
A. Council Member Count
Given the scaled-down operations, I believe it is necessary to reduce the number of elected Councilors.
Option 1: Retain current count
Option 2: Reduce to 5
B. Council Election
To simplify the election process and minimize the facilitation required, we propose returning to a nomination-based system - removing the Candidacy Filing, Qualification Checking and Campaign Period from the process.
Nomination:
- Nominations occur over a 3-day period.
- Any sCU holder may nominate a candidate, providing a Discord ID and a brief rationale for their nomination.
Nomination Acceptance:
- Acceptance occurs over a 2-day period.
- Nominees must explicitly accept their nomination and confirm their understanding of Council Member responsibilities.
C. Council Removal
To streamline facilitation, the Council shall hold an internal review to determine whether a Council Member should be removed, rather than automatic removal.
- Removal: If a Council Member no longer meets the membership criteria, fails to uphold eligibility criteria, or neglects their responsibilities, the Council may conduct an internal vote for dismissal, decided by a simple majority.
D. Impeachment Process
To reduce facilitation requirements, an impeachment process is proposed directly on the forum and voted on Snapshot without prior Temperature Check and Council Review.
Impeachment
- If a Council Member acts contrary to the DAO’s interests in ways not covered by the removal criteria or if the DAO disagrees with the result of the Council’s internal vote, an Impeachment Proposal may be submitted.
- Impeachment Proposals will not go through Council review.
Conclusion
I believe these changes will simplify the governance process, allowing members to effectively continue DAO operations by distributing responsibilities among themselves and adopting a more straightforward approach.
