BIP 93 - Council 2.0

BIP 93: Strengthening Governance and Community Engagement

Category: Governance 2.0 (community)

Status: Pending

TL;DR;

BIP 86 ratified membership of the Badger Council. The council includes
community members who have demonstrated their commitment to improving
the DAO. The purpose of this BIP is to create a framework for Council
operations and their role in ensuring an engaged community that is
active and empowered in DAO governance. This BIP takes the following
actions in support of that goal:

  • Part I: Governance (BIP) Process establishes Council
    responsibilities for administering the governance process including:

    • BIP Creation

    • Forum Signaling

    • Snapshot Voting

    • BIP Implementation

  • Part II: Checks and Balances defines Core Team and Community
    checks and balances on Council decisions and members

  • Part III: Council Structure and Responsibilities defines roles
    and responsibilities within the Council

  • Part IV: Council Budget & Incentives provides compensation to
    the Council and a budget for retaining external support.

Part I: Governance (BIP) Process

The governance process facilitates community, Core team and Council
involvement in bringing new proposals forward. The Council has primary
responsibility for facilitating Badger governance and will act for the
good of the community regardless of personal opinions or financial
interests.

This section provides the framework for:

  1. BIP Creation
  2. Forum Signaling
  3. Snapshot Voting
  4. Implementation

BIP Creation

Each BIP should balance the needs of all Badger stakeholders while
safeguarding growth and viability of the DAO.

The Council will engage with members in the Badger Forum and Discord who
would like to bring proposals to governance. Initial drafts should be
created by the sponsoring member(s) of the community and then refined in
collaboration with the Council. The Council will ensure BIPs:

  • Are properly formatted and easily understood
  • Include all relevant information for voters to make informed
    decisions
  • Have considered impacts to the Core team, treasury, tokenomics, etc.
  • Outline how BIPs address / impact prior BIPs
  • Are capable of being implemented technically and financially
  • Are safe from attack vectors and legal risk
  • Have clear implementation plans that have been vetted by the people
    who need to do the work
  • Have an BIP/RFF channel in the public Discord for community
    engagement

Forum Signaling

The Badger Forum provides the most community exposure to a proposal. For
this reason, BIPs will be posted on the Forum to give the community the
chance to provide feedback to the Council before a BIP is sent to a
snapshot vote.

The Council posts BIPs to the Forum after it is approved in draft form
by a majority of Council members. The Core team may post a BIP to remove
the Council or alter its membership, but otherwise should work through
the council.

BIP voting in the forum is a way for the community to signal support and
objections in a quantifiable way. Forum voting is one of many inputs to
the feedback loop and is non-binding. BIP signal voting and commenting
will be held on the Forum for 72 hours. The Council can vote for a
shorter signaling period.

Based on community feedback and level of engagement, the council may opt
for 4 possible outcomes:

  1. Proceed: BIP will be taken to snapshot
  2. Rework: BIP will be updated based on feedback and submitted to
    the forum feedback again
  3. Extend: The signaling period may be extended by the council to
    allow discussions to settle or to allow for additional community
    exposure
  4. Halt:
    a. Work on the BIP will be stopped until/unless circumstances warrant it being revisited
    b. The council will provide a written explanation in the Forum comments

The Core team may choose to formally endorse or object to a BIP based on
their collective view of the benefits or risks to the DAO. In this case:

  • A formal written team statement for or against a BIP can be ratified via a Core Team 2/3 majority emoji vote
  • This statement will be published on the forum and linked in the snapshot vote

Individual members of the Core team remain free to express their
personal preferences regardless of the Core Team formal statement.

Snapshot Voting

BIPs will be moved to a snapshot vote based on a majority of the Council
voting in favor via an emoji vote.

A snapshot vote outcome requires a minimum 100k votes and will remain
open for a minimum of 72 hours. A snapshot will be closed and not passed
if 72 hours have elapsed and it has not reached the 100k vote quorum.

If a snapshot does not reach quorum then the Council will evaluate the
reason for the lack of community engagement and will decide on next
steps. For example, the Council may work with the community to address
the reason it did not get enough support and then resubmit it through
the governance process which may, or may not, include another pass
through the Forum. Or, the Council could choose to let the outcome stand
with no further action.

Implementation:

  • The Core team will schedule implementation of the BIP after snapshot
    passage

  • Core Team will include a member of the Council to the pod owner’s
    meeting to discuss upcoming / approved BIPs

  • Implementation timeframe, or a plan to create one, will be
    communicated to the community after the next Core team meeting
    following the snapshot passage

  • During implementation it may become clear that the BIP cannot be
    reasonably implemented because of financial constraints, technical
    impossibility, legal risk, or some other existential risk to
    the DAO.

  • If the Core team decides a BIP cannot proceed then:

    a. The team is permitted to stop work on the BIP until the issue is resolved

    b. This issue may be resolved through a new BIP that amends or cancels the original

    c. Responsibility for the updated BIP is a shared responsibility between the Core team and the Council

Part II. Check and Balances

The Council is being entrusted with new governance responsibilities. It
is important for the community and Core Team to have the ability to
check those new responsibilities. This section outlines these checks and
balances.

Core Team Oversight

  • The Core Team will appoint an Oversight Board of their choosing to
    review Council performance and recommend improvements.

  • The Oversight Board will review council performance and compensation
    quarterly

  • At any point, the Core Team may directly post a snapshot to remove
    the Council. This will:

    a. Transfer responsibility to the Core team for moving BIPs to
    > snapshot via a simple majority of all full time team members

    b. Remove any and all Council decision making authority

    c. All subsequent governance decisions will require a snapshot vote

Community Oversight

  • The community may force a snapshot to remove the Council:

    a. Via an emoji vote on the Badger Community Discord with least 50
    affirmative votes and a majority in favor

    b. The snapshot vote will last for 96 hours. During this time
    governance will be paused unless it is deemed to be critical
    for operational or security by at least 70% of the Core Team.

    c. Votes to remove the Council are limited to one every 8 weeks

Part III: Council Structure & Responsibilities

This governance proposal assigns responsibilities to the Council with
the goal of improving and streamlining governance, increasing community
involvement and allowing the Core team to focus on strategy, operations,
partnerships and growth.

Additional Responsibilities of all Councilors: Below are Councilor
responsibilities not defined in the sections above:

  • Be present on a majority of AMA’s and community facing calls made to
    discuss governance in process
  • Participate in monthly council meetings to keep in sync and discuss
    governance process and improvements
  • Attend up to 20 hours per quarter of extraordinary meetings about
    the governance process
  • Always vote in the best interests of the DAO and the community over
    their own personal interests.
  • Never accept personal bribes or other favors for votes.
  • Any exchange or value for outcomes (eg. Badger votes for gauges,
    protocol emissions to a vault) will always be directed towards the
    DAO/Treasury and fully disclosed as part of the governance matter
    in question.

Council Roles: The standard council size is 7 members consisting of
2 Core Team councilors and 5 Community (standard/committee) councilors.

  • Core Team Councilors: The Core Team Council size will be 2
    unless a community Councilor joins the Core team. In this case, the
    person will move from the community to the core Councilor position
    and can be backfilled on the community team.

  • Standard Councilors: There will be 5 Standard Councilors elected
    from and by the community. They shall:
    a. Review and vote on 80%+ Council items
    b. Contribute to defining the council process

  • Committee Councilors: Up to 4 Standard Councilors may serve as
    Committee Councilors at any time. The are:
    a. Elected by the Council
    b. Reclassified as standard Councilors voluntarily, through a Council
    majority vote or unilaterally by the Core Oversight Board
    c. Regularly involved with the community to bring proposals forward
    d. Actively involved in creating, discussing, facilitating, documenting
    and deciding BIPs and/or council motions

  • Chairbadger: If someone steps up to drive the council forward, a
    Chairbadger of the council may be appointed:
    a. The Chairbadger shall be appointed by a majority vote of both the
    core team Oversight Board and the Council
    b. The Chairbadger may be removed by a super majority of at least 5
    council members or unilaterally by the Core Oversight Board

  • Expert Advisory Support: The Council is authorized and
    encouraged to retain:
    a. Technical writing support focused on policy and law
    b. Technical writers and advisors to support making informed decisions

Councilor resignation and replacement:

  • Resignation: Council members may resign at any point
  • Replacement: Council members can be forced to resign from the
    council with an affirmative vote by at least 5 of the
    other councilors.

Vacancies:

  • The Core Oversight Board will appoint a core team member to fill in
    a vacant seat
  • During this time the council will, through some process of their own
    choosing, identify candidates who will then be selected/ratified
    through a snapshot vote
  • Appointments will stand until a successful snapshot vote
    is completed.

Council Term and Elections

Community involvement in governance is a critical aspect of Badger DAO.
In support of this a snapshot vote to re-elect or replace council
members will be held every 6 months. The last Council vote completed on
March 30, 2022 and so the next one will occur on Sept. 30, 2022, and so
on.

Part IV: Council Budget & Incentives

Achieving the objectives of this BIP requires sustained effort by
members of the Council. This section outlines compensation in exchange
for the increased work required. Council compensation has 2 parts:

  • Locked Council Badger (LCB): Compensation locked for 1 year to align
    Councilor interests with long-term value creation
  • Monthly Stipend paid in unlocked BADGER

Any councilor may choose to waive compensation while remaining as a
member of the Council.

Locked Council Badger(LCB):

  • LCB is awarded at the start of a Councilors term
  • LCB is locked for 1 year from the award date
  • Upon award, LCB will count for boost and governance voting but
    cannot be traded or transfered until unlocked. This
    incentivizes councilors to grow and improve the DAO.
  • LCB vests at the end of each month of service but remains locked
    until the locking period expires
  • All unvested LCB will return to the treasury when a Councilor
    leaves the Council unless at least 5 councilors vote to pay
    out some or all of the unvested LCB.

Core Team Councilors: Core team members of the Council will receive
no council compensation, other than the Chairbadger.

Standard Councilors shall be paid a total of 230 BADGER per month
(115 LCB + 115 unlocked BADGER). At $8.75 per BADGER this is $24,144
per year.

Committee Councilors: Committee Councilors shall receive Standard
Councilor compensation plus an additional 545 BADGER per month (430 LCB+115 unlocked BADGER). At $8.75 per BADGER this is $57,324 in addition to the Standard Councilor compensation of $24,144 totaling $81,468.

Chairbadger: The Chairbadger may be any member of the Council and
will receive 5000 LCB annually, vested monthly and redeemable after 1
year of service. This is $43,750 per year and is in addition to other
Council or Core team compensation.

Expert / Advisory Support:

These positions should be paid on an hourly basis, and the council is
authorized to spend:

  • Up to $6,000 per month on EA services based on a majority council
    vote
  • Between $6,001 and $15,000 per month with approval from the
    Treasury Board
  • Over $15,000 per month with BIP approval.

The Council is also granted 350 BADGER per month to be used for:

  • Gitcoin Bounties
  • Analytics work
  • Research used to help formulate good decisions

**Budget: **Total max council spend at $8.75 per BADGER::

Do You Approve These Governance Improvements?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Almost - There are some things that need to be reworked before this is ready for prime-time

0 voters

1 Like

Thank you for putting this together.

I note there is a removal method for the council to remove fellow members (councillors/councilors) but I wonder if we could have the inclusion of a recall method for plebs?

There’s a clause in Part II: Checks and Balances under Community Oversight that allows the community to remove the Council. This could be updated to allow removal of one Councilor in particular rather than the whole Council.

I fear that , if needed, this is likely to create a toxic situation. If the community is unhappy with 1 member, they should bring this up with the council. If the council and team are not hearing the community and the problem is real, the community can remove the council. Let the Council be handle its own/keep them accountable for each and to other.

1 Like

@cryptomooniac I see you voted no. You always have great feedback. Interested in your input.

I appreciate you for asking, and I sincerely hope that this structure will be for the best of the project. Since some weeks ago I just decided not to get involved anymore in the governance / development of the project. I guess I had different expectations and got too emotionally invested at some point. But I wish you all the best, especially to all those amazing people that are part of the team and the community.