MENDI Governance Process
The Mendi DAO currently follows the following processes to pass proposals.
Making a proposal
Minimum voting power to submit a proposal - 50000 MENDI
- This is aimed to prevent spamming of governance proposals within the DAO.
- If you have less voting power, but you would like to make a proposal our Discord channel is a great place to find a sponsor.
- You can also contact the core team with your proposal and we are happy to sponsor interesting proposals that can move the community forward (e.g. We can also sponsor votes that we are potentially against if we see that discussion is needed.)
Request For Comment (RFC) - 3 day period
The initial stage of any proposal is to submit a request for comment.
The purpose of the RFC is to enable an initial discussion within the community to improve the proposal before the vote.
The RFC template can be found here, proposers can modify it for the needs of the specific proposal. Mendi RFC Template - Title
The RFC passes by simple majority.
There is no quorum on RFCs at the moment.
There must be an Abstain option on the proposal, beside the options given.
It is important for a healthy governance process that the MIP proposal reflects upon the feedback given during the RFC period.
Mendi Improvement Proposal (MIP) - 3 day period
Once the RFC passes the proposal moves to the actual voting phase.
At this stage the governance needs to decide if the MIP is ready to be passed.
The MIP needs to reach a quorum of 2 million voting power in order for it to pass.
Proposals need to follow the MIP Template which can be found here. Mendi Improvement Proposal Template [MIP-#] - Title
There must be an Abstain option on the proposal, beside the options given.
Role of the core team in the process
As we outlined in our decentralization roadmap in phase 1 and phase 2 the governance implements extra security measures to prevent governance attacks on the Mendi DAO.
In phase 1 this role is fulfilled by the core team, while in phase 2 this will be expanded into a security council with external members.
We see in phase 1 the role of the core team as the security council, and we will act in accordance with such function. Our goal is not to prevent proposals, but to safeguard the protocol, therefore we will also publish our view in an official response if a proposal’s execution conflicts with the interest of the protocol.
Discussion process
There are two main channels for discussing governance proposals:
Discord
Discord serves as a chat room for discussing the proposals. The aim of having the Discord is to be able to quickly discuss ideas in a less formal manner.
Mendi Governance Forum
It serves as the official place for governance discussion. RFCs and MIPs need to be posted here, and it is encouraged to write replies to the governance posts in the forum.
Please contact us on Discord if you are unable to join the official governance forum.