[DAO Discussion] Wonderland Governance Framework Amendment


Wonderland Governance Framework Amendment




The Wonderland Governance Framework exists to establish structure and transparency for the DAO. Wonderland has grown rapidly, but was not able to adapt fast enough.

This proposal aims at improving the transparency and efficiency of the current governance process by introducing minimum requirements and reducing existent timeframes.

DAO Discussion

Any member of the community can participate in the governance process by posting a DAO Discussion.

DAO Discussions are meant as a way to gauge the community’s interest on a proposed idea. At this stage, the proposal does not have to be fully fleshed out, but it should include enough information for the community to understand the potential implications and goal of the proposal.

Once a discussion has formed around an idea, and the minimum requirements have been met, the proposer can submit their proposal for the second step of the governance process, Request for Comments.


Minimum requirements to move to the next steps

  • Posted a minimum of 2 days (48h).
  • A minimum of 300 views.
  • Has 20 unique users engage with the proposal,
    • Excluding members involved in the proposal.
  • The discussion should include an informal poll.
    • The poll shows at least 60% of voters want the discussion to move forward.

In consultation with the delegated official1 , elected officials may bypass this step when submitting a proposal.

1Until voted otherwise, forum moderators and administrators will act as the delegated officials enforcing the framework.

Request for Comments (RFC)

The purpose of a RFC is to establish a formal discussion around the idea presented in the related DAO Discussion and build a proposal before a final vote. RFC submissions are reviewed by the delegated official before being approved.

The RFC is a living document, a work in progress and does not necessarily have to be fully completed from the beginning. It can evolve into a full proposal throughout a productive discussion.

Once the specifics of the proposal have been discussed, properly documented and it has met the minimum requirements, a final version of the RFC can be submitted to move forward.


Minimum requirements to move to the next steps

  • Posted a minimum of 3 days (72h).
  • A minimum of 500 views.
  • Has 40 unique users engage with the proposal,
    • Excluding members involved in the proposal.
  • The RFC should include an informal poll.
    • The poll shows at least 60% of voters want the discussion to move to a vote.
    • It should include an option to maintain the status quo.

Wonderland Improvement Proposal (WIP)

A WIP is the final stage of a proposal after being discussed through the different stages of governance. These proposals are meant to be general in nature, aiming to improve the protocol.

WIP submissions are reviewed by the delegated official before being approved. Once approved, a WIP should be up for at least 3 days before going up for vote.

The official vote is to last at least 4 days and must meet the predefined quorum. The voting options should always include an option to maintain the status quo.

Treasury Management Proposal (TMP)

A TMP is a request to alter specific parameters regarding the management of the treasury, renew previously approved budgets, or assist treasury personnel with decision making processes when required by previous governance such as WIP 14.

These proposals are to be formally voted on by the DAO. However, unlike a WIP, the TMP does not need to go through the complete governance process. A TMP should be posted by an elected official and should explain the reason for the TMP as well as the available options proposed to the DAO.

Due to a TMP bypassing the regular governance process, there needs to be certain limits to prevent the mismanagement of the treasury funds by rushing the process.

  • A TMP should not be used to modify terms of previously voted WIP that are not directly related to treasury management or does not allow that flexibility (e.g. liquid staking, redemption, $SIFU investment, etc).

  • A TMP should not be used for seed investments or buying specific tokens.

    • A TMP could be used to ask the DAO to make a specific asset a strategic asset without voting on how much should be bought.
  • In a situation where there is a conflict of interest, the regular governance process should be followed to ensure due diligence is done.

If it is unclear whether a certain treasury management situation can be dealt with using a TMP, the guidelines should be clarified and the regular governance process used.

Additional information

  • Unless another delegated official is appointed, forum moderators will ensure the framework is enforced.

  • Minimum requirements can be adjusted at the discretion of the delegated official following an informal discussion with the community. The vote should be announced and last at least 4 days.

  • When submitted by the delegated official, RFCs, WIPs and TMPs must be reviewed by another elected official for approval.

Minimum Requirements

Governance Stage Min. Timeframe Quorum Views Votes
DAO Discussion 2 days 20 users 300 60%
Request for Comments 3 days 40 users 500 60%
Wonderland Improvement Proposal 3 days N / A N / A N / A
Official Vote 4 days 5k TIME N/A 50%

Examples

Click here to expand for some quick examples

Wonderland Improvement Proposal (WIP)

User creates a DAO Discussion proposing Wonderland to become a giant of the sandwich industry. 48h later, the discussion has 200 views, 2 comments, 5 votes indicating they do not want this to move forward.

While the minimum amount of time has passed, the other minimum requirements are not met. Therefore, if the proposer submits his proposal for RFC, it will not be approved by the delegated official.

Another 48h later and the proposal gained a lot of traction. It now has 2 000 views, 50 comments and 400 votes where 90% wants the proposal to move forward. The proposer can now submit their proposal to be reviewed and approved as a Request for comments.

72h later, after taking into account the community feedback/comments, the proposer has drafted a final version of their proposal. The minimum requirements are met and the proposer submits his draft for to be reviewed and approved as a Wonderland Improvement Proposal.

After the minimum time has passed, the official vote goes live and the community can vote until the voting period is closed.

Wonderland Improvement Proposal (WIP) - DAO Discussion bypassed

An elected official wants to make a proposal, but believes the DAO Discussion step may not be required. After discussing with the delegated official, it was determined that the proposal covers an idea that the community has already shown appreciation towards. Therefore, the elected officials submit his proposal directly as a RFC.

From this point on, the rest of the process is the same as the “normal” process. The minimum requirements must be met at every step to move to the next until the vote.

Treasury Management Proposal (TMP)

A Treasury Operator (TO) wants to use the DAO’s voting power in another protocol. The TO would submit a TMP indicating why they believe the DAO should use their voting power, provide options and pros/cons for each option.

The Treasury Council would like the DAO to consider making AVAX a strategic asset held by the treasury to help with our liquid staking platform. A TMP is submitted to gather the DAO’s reply. The actual allocation is to be determined by the treasury management team and follow existing guidelines when applicable.

14 Likes

Let’s make Wonderland :grapes: again!

7 Likes

Can you define what a strategic asset is and would that be liquid or illiquid?
This part is I feel can be misconstrued. “it was determined that the proposal covers an idea that the community has already shown appreciation towards”
My suggestion is “it was determined that the proposal covers an idea that the community has already shown appreciation towards however should not be used to bypass previous items that were already voted down.”

3 Likes

Would depend on the asset/strategy. For example, consider making AVAX a strategic asset to help with liquid staking. If it gets locked/staked, then it would be illiquid.

If it’s simply we are BTC maxi and want to have 10% in BTC at all time, it would be liquid.

And noted for the suggestion. Good point.

5 Likes

On the suggestion I think it should include anything voted up or down actually.

3 Likes

Lets improve and clarify governance framework, to make this DAO more structured 🫡

7 Likes

@NalX do you think this would be a good place to add how much a vote needs to pass by to be accepted. We discussed it having to pass by a 10% margin. For example A close vote of 51% to 49% wouldn’t pass, but a vote of 55% to 45% would pass.

3 Likes

Making Wonderland :grapes: Again!

3 Likes

We are on a path to :grapes: ness, let’s get this improved framework on the road!

2 Likes

Yup! Right now its at 50%… So if we want to change it, could be the time. Unless we want to have a focused discussion o that specifically later.

And that one shouldnt be able to be changed without a formal vote.

2 Likes

Forgot to reply to this… Why up ? Unless you mean if it goes against the initial vote ?
For example, we vote to end rebases and Sifu wants to skips DD to put them back ?

I was thinking, if the vision of both votes align, I can see skipping the DD steps.
Voted for a liquid staking platform, skipping DD to modify/amend/build on the initial proposal.

Would that make more sense ?

1 Like

I’d have a separated discussion about it, together with discussing the voting system in general.

3 Likes

Yes going against initial vote whether it passed or failed.

2 Likes

Hopefully the minimum requirements for governance to move to the next step aren’t too high. Seems there has been less activity on the forum lately, so we don’t want the hurdle to be so high that we can’t enact any new changes if need be. I suppose we can use this discussion as an example to see what type of user quorum we achieve.

5 Likes

Well views look good, no poll but usually people do a simple yes or no; they just don´t like commenting much :sweat_smile:

4 Likes

I’m happy with these changes. Excited to see the DAO evolve’

5 Likes

Topic was approved for RFC:

1 Like