Governance is everybody's responsibility
This is the proposed governance process for the OpenDAO.
Hard Consensus: Requires voting on-chain, requires signing a message with the $SOS tokens in your wallet. The passed snapshots can only be changed with amendment proposals, so please think thrice before signing.
Soft Consensus: Anything other than a hard consensus. This could be a discord poll or voice chat consensus or forum post or forum token gated polls.
Original document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AE9bd7UTHu1uq8rs-DVBTk6IISPZ9ckDAdlYkP9PJP0/edit?usp=sharing
Explanation
When an idea is hatched, it circulates around the discord or twitter chats. Then people start to talk about it more and more. Then more interested people pile in.
Then sometimes, some leaders step up to head these ideas and make them into proposals. Sometimes, we bring them to the alliances to firm up these proposals.
Once enough consensus is formed, a formal proposal is written up in the forum.theopendao.com, we can also combine that with "token-gated voting". (Remember to use this address 0x41CBAC56EA5eC878135082f0F8d9a232a854447E and set token threshold to one).
Remember to use this template as well https://docs.google.com/document/d/1byt6_CgV2xMhI9Enf7igcO19Xik1fMQnefKEKnJDWlk/edit?usp=sharing
If quorum is reached, and >50% of voters agree, the proposal can be actioned upon, if there are no major financial or branding implications to the OpenDAO.
Otherwise, this decision has to be brought to snapshot for hard consensus with token voting.
Commentary
It is important to keep the governance process as simple as possible but not any simpler. The biggest risk to DAOs is voter apathy, and that is created by multiple reasons, one of them is complicated governance process.
So before we start writing another proposal to save the previous one, think twice. There is always a bias towards voting yes. And the end goal might look like "death by SOSIP", where there are too many things to vote on and too many overlapping programs, each one trying to save the previous one.
And we will lose the big picture.
As much as possible, we should use social consensus or soft consensus. And the use of snapshot is really to reconcile strong consensus on the ground. (And of course, sometimes we need snapshot to resolve highly contentious issues and break glass in emergency situations.)
Further reading for big brained folks
Thanks @taegeuk and @angyts.eth. I really like the simplicity of this.
Great job! thanks for your input and hard work!
Very well explained, thanks!
،👏
When I read the flowchart for Soft consensus, the first thing that came to mind is it looked objective, but the second last step is where I see subjectivity. How does one identify pulse of the community, because not everyone is active at all time, neither in any short period of time say 48hrs or even a week. Community may loose interest over time, it can come back sporadically by few users. There is too much variability.
I then read the explanation. It kind of provides some guidance and idea of what it could mean. May be if a bit more brainstorming on what it could mean should happen still.
And i totally get the commentary part. It does make sense that while in trying to figure out perfect way to arrive at consensus and proposal selection, we shouldn't miss the bigger picture completely and slow down or be bogged down.
So for the proposal check, what I was thinking was if there was a way to have a keyword for each proposal like a hashtag and drive a habit that whenever anyone is talking abt the proposal in forums, or discord, uses that hashtag, we can aggregate the content being generated around that hashtag, then create word clouds, do some sentiment analysis and gauge community pulse. I mean it all sounds like a plan in my head, but i am really clueless on the exact tech that will be involved in getting it all set up. I mean i can pitch in understanding and making sense of the word cloud and help in sentiment analysis, both of which i have done professionally in the past, but it will need the content aggregated and available so it can be fed to word cloud makers and sentiment analysis tools (yes i am saying some NLP tools).
But again as I propose this, i am held back by the thought about not getting lost in the details to miss the big picture. Still this approach can be taken ahead for other areas of the DAO and can be put to great use. I can repurpose the solution given the problem to be solved at hand.
Hope i am making sense.
Looking forward to comments and opinions to further discuss. :)
Nothing here yet, be the first one to comment.