Structured Forum Governance

tenzent · March 19, 2021, 11:43pm

Hello Guys !
I have taken part in my fair share of forums and found that things just work better if theres a structured process put in place. Out of all the processes I’ve seen the radicle team has probably the best structure and I think we could benefit from having something similar be put in place. Below I’ve pasted how their process works and maybe we can weigh in and decide whether we want to run one like it or just keep things as they are. One of the things I definitely think could be changed are the time frames around each stage since bancor needs a faster turnaround time for proposals but I’ve left them as they are for now so you can see how their system works.

Link : https://radicle.community/t/readme-radicle-governance-process/526

TL:DR;

Radicle’s governance process is structured around an expectation of self-direction. Community “champions” (the individual(s) who created a proposal) are expected to escalate proposals from phase to phase, with guidance from community moderators. There are four stages in the governance process. To be considered an official Governance Proposal, a proposal has to go through all four stages.

Temperature Check → Structured Discussion → Formal Review → Governance Proposal

Create a Temperature Check to initiate an informal discussion around a proposed idea and/or change.
Use feedback from the Temperature Check to draft a proposal that meets the criteria set in this document and start a Structured Discussion (t/r 5 days)
Submit the draft proposal for Formal Review by creating a Snapshot poll (t/r 5 days)
If passed, deploy a Governance Proposal via rad gov . (t/r 3 days)

Please refer to the rest of the document for details on how to navigate each phase.

Overview of Stages

Phase 1: Temperature Check - Discourse

The path to creating an official proposal starts with an informal discussion in the Governance category of radicle.community by calling for a Temperature Check. Inspired by Uniswap, a “Temperature Check” is a way to officially create a space for discussion around a question or proposed change with the goal of developing arguments and background for a potential proposal. The purpose of this phase is to get feedback on ideas and create the space for productive discourse. Anybody can create a Temperature Check to start a community discussion around an idea, question, or proposal.

To start a Temperature Check :

Create a topic and label it as follows: “Temperature Check - Your Topic of Discussion Here”.
Ask a general, non-biased question about a potential change, improvement, or action (i.e. Should swapping on the Balancer LBP be unpaused?)
Add any additional information to contextualize the question for the greater community
Collect feedback and engage in discussion for 3-5 days

It’s important to remain as objective as a view as possible. Present developed arguments and the “full picture” — not just your opinion!

Phase 2: Structured Discussion - Discourse

To move a Temperature Check forward, it should then be presented for formal, structured discussion in Phase 2. Phase 2 requires two things: a formal discussion on Discourse and a drafted proposal that presents a thorough analysis for formal review by Radicle stakeholders.

Drafted Proposal

The goal of this phase is to take the the ideas, arguments, and feedback generated in the Temperature Check and craft an overview of the proposal that meets the following criteria:

Functional description (what is this being proposed?)
Purpose (what’s the “why”?)
Background (what is the reasoning behind the proposal?)
Link to Temperature Check
Reasoning & analysis (what is the case for the proposal? what are the pros and cons?)
Technical implementation (who will be writing the code? what is the scope required?)
Impact (how does this contribute to the long-term resilience, sustainability and/or growth of the Radicle network?)
Open questions (what else needs to be figured out?)

Governance Proposals are executable code and must be audited. The Radicle core team will support community members with development resources if necessary, but please do not create a draft proposal without thinking through the technical implementation.

Structured Discussion

To escalate a Temperature Check to a Structured Discussion :

Create a topic and label it as follows: “Discussion - Your Title Here”.
Include an overview of the drafted proposal that meets the criteria outlined above and link to it’s previous Temperature Check .

Anybody can escalate a Temperature Check to a Structured Discussion by putting together an draft proposal that meets these criteria. If a Structured Discussion is started without demonstrating a successful Temperature Check, then it will be flagged and closed by community moderators.

Phase 3: Formal Review - Discourse + Snapshot

After a proposal is thoroughly discussed, the proposal can be submitted to the community for Formal Review.

To do this:

Create a Snapshot poll that includes the updated overview of the proposal and options on how to move forward. The options can be multiple choice (if to present multiple options for the proposal) or be binary, but must include the choice Make no change . The Snapshot poll length should be set to 5 days*.

Note: You can’t edit a Snapshot poll after it is submitted, so please make sure you include as much information as possible.*

Create a topic and label it as follows: “Formal Review - Your Title Here”. Link the Snapshot poll in the topic. Any topic that is labeled Formal Review and does not link to a successful Temperature check and/or does not meet the criteria outlined above will be flagged and removed.
All Radicle stakeholders are responsible for ensuring proper review of any proposal in Formal Review. This includes the core team. However, as the ‘Champion’ of the proposal, it is your responsibility to gather support for your proposal by sourcing delegates, actively responding to questions, and addressing feedback regarding the proposal.

At the end of 5 days, whichever option has the majority of votes wins. 4% of participation is required for a Snapshot to pass Formal Review. Only then should it be deployed as an official Governance Proposal. If the option “Make no change” wins, the topic should be archived by community moderators.

Phase 4: Governance Proposal

Once a draft proposal has been formally reviewed and consensus has been met in the Snapshot, it can be officially proposed as a Governance Proposal. Governance Proposals are voted for on-chain via gov.radicle.network . They are executable code, not suggestions for a team or foundation to implement. All proposed code should be audited by a professional auditor. Anybody with 1% of RAD delegated to their address can create a Governance Proposal. At the moment, proposals can be made with our custom governance CLI tool . An official governance interface for creating proposals is in development.

All proposals are subject to a 3-day voting period, and any address with voting power can vote for or against the proposal Resources for proposing can be found here .

To create a Governance Proposal:

Write the proposal code and deploy the proposal via rad gov . All proposed code should be audited by a professional auditor.
Ensure at least 1 million RAD is delegated to your address. If you do not have enough RAD to create a proposal, find a delegate to either delegate to you or propose on your behalf.
Create a topic titled “Governance Proposal [Proposal Number] — [Your Title Here]”. Be sure to include:

A link to the official proposal in gov.radicle.network
Links to any relevant Snapshot polls/discussion threads and
link to any relevant Snapshot polls/discussion threads.
A full overview of the proposal, with any feedback or changes introduced during the Formal Review

Topics that begin with “Governance Proposal” that have not successfully passed a Temperature Check and a Formal Review should be removed by community moderators.

Community Moderators

Moderators steward governance by supporting community members as they escalate proposals through the governance process. This includes:

Refining and updating governance processes based on needs of the project
Ensuring proper following of the governance process
Removing spam & members who violate Code of Conduct

glenn · March 21, 2021, 3:11am

I am not opposed to the idea of having a more structured governance system or a better set of guidelines for bringing up proposals. I think having a simple template of sorts when creating a new topic in the governance category might be a good start and will go a long way. In addition, I would like to see some rules being enforced (e.g. disallowing bundling of multiple items in a single proposal).

mbr · March 21, 2021, 11:53am

I agree in general.

I enjoy the relative lack of bureaucracy but concede that we could benefit from better organization. Would you be willing to collaborate on something with me? Maybe something between what we have now, and the system that radicle has in place. Here is where my mind is at:

Stage 1. Draft Proposal. The forum is upgraded with more descriptive categories and moderated appropriately by community members. Draft proposals are then submitted to these categories for discussion/engagement, and revised as needed.

Stage 2. Final Proposal. Forum moderators can then move finalized proposals from the drafting forum to a dedicated page - reflecting that these are the vote-ready proposals. This would also be helpful vis-a-vis our Snapshot implementation. Moderators can help to ensure that the block nominations are reasonable, and even set a proposed vote commencement date and time.

Stage 3. Snapshot Vote. Either the authors, moderators, or someone else in the community can execute the proposal for a vote at/near the planned commencement date.

So major changes are:

Organize the forum to separate rough drafts from polished proposals.
Start using the forum features to give moderator privileges to highly competent community members (such as yourself, and I can think of two or three more people who would be equally suitable).

tenzent · March 21, 2021, 6:45pm

absolutely I’m down to draft something, i also would add i quite like the “temperature check” idea where members don’t necessarily have a set in stone solution but they wish to address a problem so they create a brainstorming session of sorts. and @glenn has a point I believe it should be fairly simple and concise.

philipeachille · March 21, 2021, 9:32pm

my two cents … be careful to not end up having to mange the management … start simple and extend where problems occur.

badtrader · March 22, 2021, 3:44am

MBR’s idea sounds nice. The Radicle method seems kind of excessive and slow. But agree we can add a tiny bit of more structure to the current situation.

tenzent · March 22, 2021, 5:00am

Yo, I added a bit to what MBR had above if anyone else has any more things to add this seems like a way to keep things more organized. I think each category should also have its own little guidelines page so we don’t squish too much info into one post like the radicle one. something like a sample post with a recommended but not required format would be good to have at the top of every category.

Stage 0. Temperature Check (Non-Mandatory). For Users that want to address an issue or token they feel is important but are not sure they have the best solution/proposal parameters a “Temperature Check” thread can be made. This is a general discussion thread where the Author can address an issue or a token they wish to list with perhaps a few ideas of his own on how to go about it and the community adds to and edits it together in order to form a Draft Proposal or if sufficiently developed be put forth as a Final Proposal.
NOTE : Temperature checks are not necessary to submit a Draft Proposal.

Stage 1. Draft Proposal. The forum is upgraded with more descriptive categories and moderated appropriately by community members. Draft proposals are then submitted to these categories for discussion/engagement, and revised as needed.

Forum Categories

Temperature Check : Temperature checks are more free form discussions where the author does not necessarily have to have a concrete finalized plan/solution but rather one common issue or token proposal for everyone to unite around and brainstorm.
Whitelisting : Whitelisting Proposals are essentially applications for insurance, as such proposals under this category should be about protocol security. This means things such as Mint functions, Audits, Distributions of the Token’s Supply, etc.
Co-Investments/LM Rewards/LM Extensions : Co-investment and or LM proposals should be centered around the economic value a token brings to the platform and how an increase in Co-Investment or LM incentives would benefit bancor. These proposals should show there is an interest to not only provide liquidity but also for the trading to occur on the platform (be it through aggregators or directly on bancor) since liquidity that doesn’t accrue fees is counter productive. This is also a great time to pitch the value of your coin and the potential growth since a co-investment does also mean bancor incurs some equity over time in said TKN.