DAO Proposals submitted to previous Community portal platform

Finalizing DAO Rules

Before submitting a proposal to finalize the DAO Rules, let’s first invest some more time into discussing the most difficult topic of the Rules - the proposal collateral. Other parts of the formal proposal in preparation are i) rewording of some paragraphs (with no system or parameters change) and ii) setting the threshold height for the Supermajority voting.

The collateral has been a difficult topic in the Community Improvements Portal and Discord, as it is uneasy to balance the collateral amount and mechanics just right to protect the platform and the DAO from malicious intent and exploitation - which is the singular purpose of the collateral system - while still allowing the community to take active part in the governance. With such a difficult topic, it is once again necessary to discuss it and arrive at a beneficial solution before including it in a formal proposal to finalize the DAO Rules.

  1. It is proposed that the collateral amount will be lowered to 5,000 WRT.
  2. Other than that, the mechanics are proposed to remain unchanged, as they’re proving to provide the desired protection from spam and malicious proposals.
  3. As it might have been unclear precisely what happens to the collateralized WRT, this is to clear up that the collateral is held in the DAO Treasury until it’s returned to the proposer when their proposal succeeds (or if not returned, this way it may be reused for farming and other rewards, thus trickling back down to the community).
  4. If the proposal fails, the collateral will not go into the Treasury, it will instead be put into a vesting contract that will release it back to the proposer, linearly 1 unlock/month, for 5 total months.
  5. Some discussion threads around this topic arrived at the conclusion that even though the collateral amount might be too high for some individuals, it is a beneficial system to protect the platform, and there are already creative solutions on how to push well-written and discussed proposals past the collateral, as has happened with the FT Royalty Fees proposal.

EDIT: Added point 4., based on the discussion below.

1 Like