The WL2.0 team previously made a foundational proposal to improve several identified shortcomings to the existing Wonderland 1.0 system. This proposal covered governance, tokenomics and management, and was made at a time when Wonderland was potentially being wound down. Given where Wonderland is now placed, it is easier for compartmentalized individual proposals to be raised for the DAO’s consideration, based on targeted areas of improvement. The first of which is a proposal on the decision-making governance.
It’s great to see the progression of proposals and subsequent Wonderland Improvement Initiatives (WIP) once again. What is clear however is that the DAO governance processes need refinement and improvement.
WL2.0 will propose several governance improvements. The latest WIP by TheSkyHopper on Treasury Management (WIP#7) also notes a need to improve the governance structures and processes.
To enable further governance refinement, the first thing that needs to be addressed is the governance process (Discussion->RFC->WIP->Vote->Implementation). The DAO needs an effective governance process to make decisions. Ineffective decision-making will delay Wonderland from progressing. Secondly, as a community we need to be able to set the broad direction and parameters by which the organization operates.
Creating immediate clarity and improvement to the governance process. To support all future proposals and decisions. The intention of this proposal is to make small adjustments that can be implemented right away.
Immediate issues that need to be addressed
- The governance process is chaotic, requirements for proposals to move between stages are unclear.
- The governance process is slow, we cannot adapt to the quickly changing environment.
- Proposals can be highly complex with wide ranging implications that require thorough consideration.
- Communication around proposal discussions and votes needs improvement.
- There is no consistent policy applied by the management team on when proposals progress from Discussion->RFC->WIP->Vote->Implementation.
Current decision-making process
Based on published information:
- Raise a discussion post on the Wonderland forum. If the discussion post has sufficient community support (undefined what the requirements are), it can progress to stage 2.
- Raise a Request for Comment (RFC) post on the Wonderland forum. Include a poll with options to gauge community opinion and revise the proposal during the RFC stage as feedback is received. Once the RFC has matured into a proposal (undefined what the requirements are), it can progress to stage 3.
- A forum moderator will whitelist an RFC and a WIP is then drafted. Once approved, the WIP is posted with a minimum duration of 4 days before a vote occurs (stage 4).
- A snapshot vote is created. A minimum of 100 TIME/MEMO is required to create the snapshot vote. The duration for the snapshot vote is 7 days.
As is evidenced by the above, there is a lack of clarity on the minimum timeframes or thresholds required to progress through the various stages, with each stage potentially taking a significant amount of time before getting to the point of a vote.
Proposed immediate changes to the decision-making process:
- Establish and publish a decision-making charter that defines the agreed processes and time-frames from this proposal and binds the Wonderland management team to enact these processes on behalf of the DAO. A draft is provided below.
- Create a new forum section called “Proposals” and merge the existing stage 1 and stage 2 into this single stage, with an accompanying template. Keep the General Discussion section for unstructured discussions of a general nature.
- As part of the weekly Mod-team update (WIP #6) summarize the state of all current proposals, which phase they are in and time to move to the next phase.
- All votes must fall over the weekend to ensure increased participation.
Draft Decision-making Charter
The Wonderland community governs itself via the Wonderland DAO, the decentralized governance framework that supports the organization’s treasury. This charter defines the proposal and decision-making process by which the DAO enacts change and gives direction to the Wonderland management team.
All proposals must follow the voting procedure. The team is bound to implement any proposal that successfully completes the voting procedure. All processes and decisions are to be shared transparently with the community in a timely manner.
Stage 1: Proposals
- Any community member may initiate a Proposal in the Wonderland forum, according to the template.
- The author / team are to actively engage with the community to address feedback received and amend the proposal as appropriate.
- The author may flag the proposal for progression to WIP when the Proposal meets the following criteria:
–At least 7 days has passed and active discourse has occurred on the forum post.
–The Proposal author(s) actively engage with discussions in the Forum and Discord.
–The Proposal author(s) incorporate community feedback into the Proposal.
–The Proposal poll shows >60% support for the Proposal.
–The Proposal poll has at least 400 votes.
- The Mod-team evaluates the Proposal and where the above criteria is met, it becomes a WIP. At all times, the Mod-team is to share their evaluation outcome publicly with the community.
- Proposals that do not meet these criteria within 21 days are closed.
Stage 2: Wonderland Improvement Proposal
- Proposal is eligible to proceed to WIP.
- The author(s) submit the final Proposal to the forum, without alteration from the previous stage.
- The Mod-team reviews and approves the post and assigns a WIP-number.
- The Management-team creates a snapshot vote after 3 days.
Stage 3: Snapshot Vote
- Wonderland Management will raise a new Snapshot vote based on the final WIP submission.
- The snapshot vote duration will be for 5 days, but must fall over a weekend i.e. a vote created on a Sunday evening would require a 6 day duration.
- The vote duration may be reduced at the Mod-team’s discretion based on the complexity and impact of the vote. If the vote duration is changed it must be highlighted within the Stage 3 WIP.
Passing a Proposal
A proposal passes when it receives a simple majority vote and reaches quorum at the end of the vote duration.
Duplicate / Conflicting Proposals
To ensure the community’s time and effort is not wasted:
- Proposals that duplicate existing proposals may be rejected.
- Authors of duplicate proposals are encouraged to collaborate with the author(s) of the proposal they duplicated.
- Proposals that conflict with approved WIP’s cannot be voted on for at least 3 months after the relevant WIP was approved.
Exceptional Circumstances for Wonderland Management Intervention
Wonderland Management may intervene by putting a proposal on hold, or rejecting it, under the following exceptional circumstances only. In all cases, the decision and grounds for taking action must be publicly communicated.
- The proposal is a duplicate.
- The proposal conflicts with an existing proposal.
- There is a reasonable suspicion of fraud or other malicious intent.
- The proposal conflicts with the overall intent and objectives of the DAO.The proposal violates the law or is otherwise likely to cause harm to the DAO.
- The governance process has not been followed.
- The cost to implement the proposal is not within the capacity of the treasury to fund.
If a proposal is rejected, it may be resubmitted except in cases where the original rejection was due to points 3 or 5 above. A resubmitted proposal must be tagged as [Resubmission] with a link back to the original submission. To be considered, the resubmission needs to demonstrate sufficient change, addressing the reason(s) for being rejected.
Responsibility of Wonderland management (founders, moderators, elected officers)
The management team implements the direction and intent of the Wonderland community, as established through the DAO:
- Ensure all proposals follow the decision-making process.
- Only interfere in the governance process to guard the best interest of the DAO.
- Implement all Vote outcomes efficiently, with due care and transparency.
- Yes, adopt these improvements to the governance process
- No, keep the governance process as it is