Governance Process

Governance Process

In Tracer DAO’s governance structure, proposals can be proposed to one of 2 platforms depending on the proposal function:

  1. System Proposals
  2. Growth Fund Proposals

The passage below will detail the processes for submitting proposals to each of the 2 platforms and what purposes they serve.

System Proposals

System proposals may be made to make changes to anything that resides within the Tracer DAO ecosystem including:

  • Factory based financial contracts;
  • Any DAO treasury funds;
  • Updating/terminating other proposals (Service Providers/vesting schedules);
  • Public distribution events;
  • Liquidity mining events; and
  • Airdrops.

The system proposal process follows the following schedule:

  1. Proposal consensus is built through the Discourse. Any member may post in the EOI category to express interest for a proposal (informal/unformatted). Proposals may be formalised based on EOI posts. Additionally, proposals may be pushed straight to the System Proposals category if they are correctly formatted and specified.

  2. Proposal is pushed to Snapshot by any DAO member (holding TCR tokens) referencing the proposal on Discourse in the Proposal Lobby .

  3. Proposal in Proposal Lobby is then updated with it’s respective proposal number on Snapshot (Proposal #xx:) by Discourse moderators. Numbered proposals signify that a proposal has been pushed through to Snapshot.

  4. Voting process: There will be 2 days of Snapshot voting immediately after the proposal is live (only DAO members may vote). Snapshot voting requires a majority vote for a proposal to successfully pass.

  5. After a successful Snapshot vote, the technical implementation will be created by the Mycelium team (or created by the proposer if they wish to create it themselves). The Mycelium implementation will be published on the Tracer Github once completed.

  6. The proposal may then be pushed on-chain by a DAO member.
    a. Through Etherscan;
    b. Through Governance Interface; or
    c. By any other means.

  7. Multisig relay:
    a. After the proposal is pushed on-chain there is an initial 2-day warm-up period ;
    b. After the warm-up , the multisig is able to relay and execute the results from the Snapshot votes (via multisig on-chain vote). The multisig has a total of 5 days to relay the voting results on-chain. (3 days voting + 2 days cool down); and
    c. At the end of the 5 days, the proposal is executed on-chain and is live.

Growth Fund Proposals

Growth Fund Proposals may be proposed to fund Service/Growth contributions (in exchange for TCR) including:

  • New Service Providers and contractors and employees of existing Service Providers;
  • Operational expenditure;
  • Advisory; and
  • Short-term development.

The growth fund proposal process follows the following schedule:

  1. Proposal consensus is built through the Discourse. Any member may post in the EOI category to express interest for a proposal (informal/unformatted). Proposals may be formalised based on EOI posts. Additionally, proposals may be pushed straight to the Growth Fund Proposals category if they are correctly formatted and specified. Proposals may also be proposed based on work listed in Tracer DAO’s 'Grants Platform.

  2. The Growth Fund Managers will then make the decision to accept or reject the growth fund proposal.

  3. Accepted proposals will then be implemented.

Any suggestions on improving, changing or optimising this process are welcomed.


Process in the Spotlight

I was following @Bob_Boyle_1662 slamming it in the Discord with the sniper theme, the graphics and animations, and there was a clear and obvious appetite for his contribution. So I was a little taken aback by some of @Robdog approach {but in the same breath - I also agreed with the process questions @Robdog has raised} Also in @Bob_Boyle_1662 defence he had a multitude of leader Roles (the usual suspects :slight_smile: ) going gaga over his work – and more than one spontaneous demands he put a proposal forth and come work full time. So – that’s what he did!

Given the level of interest he had on the discord channel, probably not the surprising the EOI step didn’t get done. If you look at the purpose of the EOI platform, it is a mechanism to confirm there is a fair amount of interest in a service. The amount of engagement Bob got on the discord server significantly eclipsed the engagement of the EOI postings. Job done right?
"EOI Purpose"
“Informal platform for expressing interest for new solutions or services to Tracer DAO (Expression of Interest). If enough traction has been gained for a particular post, a proposal will be formulated and pushed through to System Proposals or Growth Fund Proposals.”

The issues that @Robdog brought up, are probably the kind of questions and issues which would ideally get hammered out in the EOI platform, through the informal process of members engaging in the EOI, and providing a valuable platform and period for the relevant questions to be asked, and answered, and the proposal would slowly emerge in a community consistent form.

This is like the way the public sentiment and input about politicians positions on governance issues are canvassed through public debates, the media appearances, the talk shows and inquisitorial media process, with Polls being the information surfacing device. The mechanics of a referendum or plebiscite is closer to DAO governance process, and the formulation of Question (Proposal) to be proposed is a super critical part of that governance mechanisms.

So even though “enough traction had been gained” from the Discord engagement, maybe a critical piece that was missing was how the proposal was “formulated” before being pushed through to Proposal vote?

Possible Small Fix
I actually had assumed (before reading the process guidance in the threads) that EOI was a control gated staging area, for baby Proposals. But I can also see the sense of having a “permissionless” process of sorts, so proposals can be made without censorship. The process as it is designed now allows that for Growth Fund Proposals.

In another DAO I participate in there is a risk of a Denial of Governance (made that one up – hope it makes sense!) by having a situation where malicious actors can flood the DAO Proposal App with spam Proposals, which if allowed to continue would lead to disengagement in governance and a breakdown of the DAO. Some DAOs have a pre-proposal step where the proposal requires a certain level of staked sponsorship before it moves through to Proposal stage.

Maybe the solution is to make the EOI a required step, with some mechanism of quantitatively measuring “traction”, before the proposal can advance to the Proposal Lobby? Maybe the ability to push a proposal straight through to Proposal Lobby even if having great engagement and traction in the Discord Server, is just too unstructured and does not provide a fair and unfettered platform for discussion? If you think about it – who wants to come down hard and heavy on a proposal in the Discord – If @Robdog had been all frowny on the comment that Bob should put a proposal in, it just wouldn’t work in that space at that time, which was positive and upbeat. It is the wrong forum? The Discord appears to me as a forum where you can share your support for an idea, more than you can share your concerns.

Off-chain inspiration
In Australia when a ‘proposal’ for a building development is put forward which may impact the community, there is a “Public Notification Period” where a sign is put up on the land with the proposal, and a formal mechanism for objection. I have been involved in some large projects (oil and gas, property developments) where it impacts a wide community, and we have had “town hall” meetings, where the members of the community can come and ask questions, dig deep into the details, query the specifics, and give their objections and input.

If people do not have this opportunity, to level up their information to what the proposer has, then it can lead to disenfranchisement. They will not own the outcome of the governance vote (whereas if it is a robust process they have trust in - they will accept and own the outcome even if not the way they voted)

A Potential Solution

  1. All proposals require a public notification period in an EOI type platform
  2. A Proof-of-Traction mechanism is put in place for the community to sponsor the EOI into the Proposal Lobby
  3. Once in the Proposal Lobby a Proposal Sponsor is assigned to the Proposal to support a Proposal formulation.
  4. The Proposal Template is modified to provide more clarity for voters (such as the issues and suggestions @Robdog raised)

Personally, overall I feel Bob has put up a fair proposal (won’t chunk that in here - I am to long winded already!).

I agree there could be more definition and linkage to Purpose and Objectives of Tracer.
I would be happy to work with a working group (I would ask @Robdog and @Bob_Boyle_1662
are in it) to make some amendments to the standard template of a proposal that can answer these types of question before being put to proposal. Full and Complete Communication would make it so much easier. I was over most of the engagement that @Bob_Boyle_1662 has been having in Discord, but these servers get pretty full and it is hard to be over all the conversations, and I think it can become easy to forget to take people for the journey which is needed to make informed decisions ie a governance vote. A still brief but a little bit more targeted Proposal Template may help this.

Not a lot has to be added, as it has a pretty good structure already - but maybe some things like:
Purpose: How this links to the purpose of the DAO
Priority: Why this, why now?
Pricing: Calculation into every day language
Portfolio: Links to previous works
Proof of capability: References, testimonial type.
Performance: Step response if non-performance.

And that’s my 2trc worth!

What say you?


Thank you @jme for the great overview, background and suggestion. I think that is an excellent idea and would be happy to contribute towards developing such a proposal template. I am not sure if we have mapped out the process from interested → contributor, I believe a clear process there could really help put the proposed work here into good context and smoothen the onboarding of new contributors.


Hey there @Robdog that is terrific. I agree we can bring some great clarity to the process. New contributors are gold. There is a saying in Thailand (I lived there for many years) " dueng sot" which basically means “fresh money” - it refers to the money that people come by unexpectedly, and it is meant to convey a sense of luck, and abundance, and joy. Like a short sharp fresh rainfall when it is hot and humid - it brings extra energy to face the world. New members are like this are they not? Fresh blood, fresh ideas, fresh possibilities. This can be invigorating for the existing members.

I am in Brisbane, AEST (GMT+10). Lets work out some times to do video chat and kick this off. Saturday 11 AEST, or Monday 10AM aest.


Beautifully put! Completely agree.

I am in CEST (GMT+1), so perhaps morning my time - late afternoon/evening your time could work? Can add me on Discord to coordinate (Robdog#1531)


This is a productive conversation on a really important topic.

At its heart, the tension seems to be between incentivising high quality, value for token proposals versus encouraging community engagement. To me, where the balance lies will change depending on the maturity of the DAO, but given the early stage of Tracer DAO perhaps the bias should be towards encouraging community engagement?

There should also be an acknowledgement that the skills that go into writing a persuasive grant/proposal are not necessarily the same skills Tracer DAO needs. An enhanced proposal template would go a long way to covering that gap.

Finally, is there anyway to consolidate and leverage our existing mechanisms that track the traction/support behind a proposal/idea? Members can engage with Tracer community over a number of different forums, and there’s doesn’t seem to be a way to track a member’s overall engagement and community standing unless you have an profile on each of those forums. I myself can’t seem to get onto the Discord, where I understand the bulk of @Bob_Boyle_1662’s contribution is (be forever grateful if someone could help me with this!).

Also- I love @jme’s reimagining of the phrase ‘my 2 trc’ for the DeFi era, might have to start using that myself!


Hey there @Dour_Scotsman did you get Discord sorted? Drop me a line and I will see what I can do. I am relatively new to Discord as well so its fresh for me :slight_smile: Here is the basic steps which you may have tried already.

1 - Click on this link Tracer >|<
2 - If you have not set up a Discord account/App - follow the prompt to download, install and set up and account
3 - You may now need to re-click the link - do so now.
4 - The link now should take you into the Discord server.
5 - The tricky part is now to work through the introductory steps to get access to all the channels. Sometimes there are messages at the top of the screen which if you are not looking out for can fade into the noise.
6 - Follow the instructions for getting access to all the channels - Tracer has a mature Discord Chart of Topics which provides good structure and the ability to not get communication overwhelm (ish - I still get a little bit of communication overload!).
7 - Reach out if 1-6 suck and get you no where but frustrated!
Cheers @jme


Thanks @jme! that did the trick- I’m now just trying to fit my mouth around the firehose.


Know what you mean! I go thru phases of wood - reaching out, then metal - pruning back! Have to shape the info landscape! Catch up on Discord :slight_smile:

1 Like

Happy to listen in (to learn a thing or two) if you haven’t had the call yet and it would be acceptable (and time zones would allow - I am in Europe). If not, also fine. Cheers.

1 Like

As @Dour_Scotsman has alluded to, a lot of the systems that we implement in place are dependent on the maturity of the DAO. Currently, members are able to post an EOI or they can skip the EOI and go straight to a proposal if they feel as though the proposal will gain traction (in addition to being correctly formatted). As @jme has mentioned, when the traffic for proposals picks up, we can start to implement rules including: “consensus check polls” needing to reach a quorum of 30 yes votes before being able to pass through to a formal proposal before being used on Snapshot. Uniswap use a “temperature check” → “consensus check” → “governance proposal” before it is pushed on-chain. We would not currently benefit from using a system as described as it creates unnecessary complexity. As we progress we may move to a similar (improved) process.

We are of the stance that we should keep the process as simple as possible at all times. When further demand for complexity is needed, we will then start to implement further methods to match.

1 Like