# Governance Squad Sync
###### tags: `governance`, `running-notes`

MEETING 26.04.24

* Open gov added to roadmap
Issue is that this should have been done when the roadmap was proposed, however there is a gap of representation of tactical / implementation of the DAO into the leadership circle so they have context gaps and cannot adjust their own plans to integrate needs

* retroactive funding timeline + gov2
when cassidy is back Lucas, Bhaji and Cassidy spend time on it

* issues with the claiming timeframe

* Amendment to founding docs ‘mission’

* 2 new proposals from product

* Top 5 integrations WG

MEETING 05.03.24

List of proposals coming up (excluding runtime upgrades)
1) Treasury spending update proposal
2) Amendments to Founding Documents (Founding Documents, Active Collabotor agreement, Mission, Addition of the governance process)
3) Delegation programme proposal
4) Treasury Group Mandate
5) Revenue Model
6) Staking for pools

External:
- Tangem Wallet proposal
- Tangem wallet proposal
- Posting revenue model, that could inform a new way of thinking about the Treasury and how it is being spent. More indepth post coming in May
- May - Resource Group Mandate - mid May
- Staking for Pools - need more pools, tech team need to build various functionality, how do we find out where the ENG team is at. First proposal is high level about the staking and second proposal
- Treasury spending update
- Delegation Proposal - needed: legal research, clear model -
- - Treasury Dashboard Proposal - (timing, proposal

Own track
- Start of May: published start of May and voting in May CNF retroactive funding proposal

- Increasing participation (setup wallets, where to vote etc.)
- Active Contributor Call tomorrow - Gov subjects
-

MEETING 10.10.23

Agenda:
1. Run through past proposals and some 'current' i.e. fees, staking, roadmap and do a quick retro
1. Discuss upcoming proposals and figure out who will support/post etc]

| Like | Dislike | Change
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Pool Types, quick and seemless | Linked Pools, seemed so hard | How we forecast accurate deadlines
|

## Past proposals (Q3 2023)
| Proposal description | Who | When
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
|NS3 Pop | Kirill | Onchain vote 15.09 |
|
|Anemoy | Martin | CG assessment 30 + Onchain vote 15.09 |
| Linked Pools | Frederick | passed on OS 21.08 |
| CP63: Definitions of Pool Types & Categories | Orhan with Lucas | Passed on OS 15.08 |
| POP Version 3 | Jay and Colin | Passed on OS 28.09 |

In motion
| Proposal description | Who | When |
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| CP75 | Runtime Upgrade | Council motion | 9.10

Agreements
Make any agreements we need i.e:
* The Protocol Engineering Group must must read any technical proposal and report back to the k/f engineering team a list of technical changes
* Ivan should not be the author (i.e. Cassidy. Lucas or Jeroen must) of financial or technical proposals but can support on these proposals

# Notes previous#
What kind of first proposal?
Visionary document on how revenue graphs and implementing pool fees

Proposals cadence
* Rewards - live in RFC - next step - council fasttrack

Later

* - RFC live (goes to opensquare, deployed onchain later as a Runtime Upgrade)
* Roadmap - (Kate and Cassidy proof 24/25) RFC proposed Jeroen Monday 28
* NS3 Pop Process CP5 (credit group report 25.08, on chain vote week last week August )
* Anemoy Pop Process CP5 (credit group report 25.08, on chain vote week starting 08.09)
* [Pool Types + POP](https://https://docs.google.com/document/d/1017GPWffWmZVnMtL8kcx9DtuAQet_YX7kr8omrOWeVg/edit#heading=h.2z5mjwc2mqk9) Lucas - post directly as RFC ()
* [Centrifuge Fees](https://https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H4pEcN8jHgtm7mHLgdTyfIMhNEGIJm_lh8dWXb11Rv4/edit#heading=h.j3eqgkb4wzal) Jay post discussion by 9 September
* Prime Pool Onboarding Asad (mid September)

Action: Have call with Lucas
- Check timing on Pool types
- Check that Jay can put up discussion on Fees
-

Dependencies/Questions
If and when Staking passes it is added as an amendment to the Roadmap. There was agreement in the original RFC that there would be quarterly update at a minimum, so we can add more 'regular updates' to the Roadmap

Are we alinged: (considering the staking proposal as an example) Technical proposals only have the opensquare vote because we assume that any on chain change with require an onchain vote (via runtime upgrade) when it is deployed/implemented

Technical proposals should also be able to be
When the Anemoy pool launches there should already be an agreement about the Pool types

With the fee proposal that has been accepted by token holders, we're forced to charge them 40 bits, fees won't go live before Anemoy live. The bips are different

Roadmap: Once staking has gone through there can be another vote opensquare

Pool types
True: we should submit 3 CPs instead of bundling them?
- 10 introduction of pool types and fees (Lucas), changes to pop for open pools (Colin)
- Centrifuge prime governance process and fees (Asad)

As part of Pool Rewards we include the following

The default rewards rate the of new pools launching is 0. The rewards will be made as a separate RFC if a pool is launched (onchain vote)

Governance tactics
## Governance and DAO Goals and Priorities by Quarter
###### tags: `governance`, 'DAO' `priorities`

> Objective: prioritise which DAO and governance proposals and work streams to focus on, what needs to be done for each stream and who is responsible

2023 Goal: Increase excitement for CFG holders and activate the DAO

# Current Priorities
- Help increase visibility and activation of the Credit Group
- Now: Work with Mark to create content
- Make 3 CG members ACs
- Later: (expand mandate and sccope of CG)
- Onboard new quality ACs (experts) & create new pipelines of contributors via Ambassadors programme
- Create more content to market our progress and existsence
- Progress governance decentralization
- governance proposals
- participation
- delegation
- move to Open Gov
Centrifuge Governance Support Group
- Improve content (Lucas sending some examples)
- Add people

# UPCOMING
Treasury Resource Allocation Management Group
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18Q3Fbpqp8D_rF3JYMxwg8VyJeO6_if2xCU_hqk8sTZE/edit

Facilitator 1:
Needs
* Finance/Accounting Background
* Expertise in token economics
* Can communicate plans, represent the group well in public discourse, and bring others to the group.
Wants
* Experience in DAOs/decentralized governance
* Knows our priorities and strategy
What would be reasonable for them to be paid?
3-4K USD P/M (KATE)

Prospects:
- Dan Hassan (ex Olympus grants manager, coder who can math and token)
- Daniel Shavit (ex Genesis DAO, economics and finance background), interested

Blog - [[Centrifuge - Milestones of Decentralized Governance ](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1umDdsl-nSnZNO7fnf1k1hmyt1lkVDdlLWDw46O9CEcQ/edit)]

# ONGOING WORK STREAMS (non proposals)
Credit Group
- work of pushing it forward to Kate (Kate kicks off a biweekly with Mark)
- Mark starts a Credit Group working group
What is the short term need?
- content topics, blog post about the credit group and credit, posting more about the members i.e. linkedin series

Blog: Centrifuge - Milestones of Decentralized Governance

### Governance Proposals

#### Treasury non spending proposal - draft by Friday, RFC Cassidy

#### Staking proposal (RFC week starting the 12th) (Ivan, supported by Cassidy) TECH ONLY
* Staking Proposal Jeroen, Frederick, checking with Eli
* Build excitement around the proposal i.e. marketing talks about it, share it in next Gov Call/AC
* RFC (Ivan?)
* Should the RFC period be open for longer) -> Opensuare (15th June?)
* Note: Batch opensquare proposals?

#### Low treasury spending proposal (?) RFC June)
- Cassidy, Ivan, Orhan, Kate draft the spending proposal
- inputs and posts it (week starting 12 June)
- Content of proposal
Propose no spending
Propose areas of 'spending impact'

#### Linked Pools RFC (Frederik, supported by Ivan/Cassidy) (RFC 23 May!)
* [In RFC](https://gov.centrifuge.io/t/rfc-linked-pools-technical-proposal/5453)
* This needs to be proposed first before the PEG takes further steps on the Roadmap
* Open
* PEG opinion?
* -> Opensquare (
*
#### Roadmap proposal by PEG??
Delayed because of Linked Pools, when the LP is voted through then the PEG will propose the roadmap

#### Delegation (still in scoping) July
* Debate launched with publication of Ivan's research Gov call 24th May - Ivan and ? work on the prototype
* Discovery of what is needed (forum), possible integrations/tooling, design of optimal solution (done in Forum and in Calls)
* RFC forming end of June

#### OpenGov scoping and transition June
- Orhan set up docs and necessary calls, start the research
- Open the discussion
- Aim for a decision on 'when' mid July

#### Resource Allocation Group Mandate (?) RFC end of July
* Create some high level alignment for the Resource Allocation group (Kate, GCG)
* Understand who is needed
* How many group members? (3-5) contributor...
* Headhunt a facilitator (a Resource expert from another DAO - coordinator like Mark), someone from U-Penn? someone Dan Hassan
* facilitator propose
* Form the group and make the RFC (week starting X July )
Resource Allocation Group Mandate may involve:
* Helping communicate which areas and priorities are aligned with goals of Centrifgue, propose 'spending goals and priorities'
* Explaining implications of proposals
* Giving opinions on treasury proposals (like a recommendation like the credit group gives? less formal?)
* Teasury management (making proposals to our DAO for good management of funds i.e. investing our treasury in other DAOs)
* Formalising the legal part of swapping and changing CFG
* Helping Centrifuge efforts to attract other DAO treasuries to invest in pools

# DONE
Implement the Reward and implement the AIR Burn (RFC) Ivan (LIVE)

Stellaswap RFC (stellaswap)
- Passed Opensquare
- Stellaswap proposing off chain vote (passed)
- PASSED VIA ON CHAIN VOTE

#### Governance Framework V2 (Orhan)
- [In RFC ](https://gov.centrifuge.io/t/rfc-changes-to-our-cp-framework-and-governance-process/5448)
- Opensquare
- PASSED VIA ON CHAIN VOTE

Lucas dependencies
- Check staking proposal
- Give feedback on Resource Management initial proposal and group mandate

## Other
**Marketing <> Governance Overlap**
- [ ] Catch up Bhaji, Cassidy, Orhan, Ivan, David
* How do marketing market governance proposals
* Workshopping the newsletter AND restarting a marketing Newsletter
* Take Forum newsletter and weekly update and combine it to make a once a monthly general newsletter (Kate, David)
- very short paragraph at the beginning: here's what's interesting this week, here's what you should expect in this newsletter

### Capital Incentives Investments Programme (Kate/Colin)
- Scoping - draw out brief and dependencies
- Needs to be owned, executed, delivered by someone who is not Colin

## Next

Suggestion: mini research project + Ivan/GCG

In DAOs delegation can be a double edged sword. The benefits are clear: token holders who do not have the time or capacity or technical ability to govern can delegate their tokens to someone who has the expertise and capacity to do so. However, delegate models have had mixed success. We want to look closely at the designs before implementing

Looking at Delegate models across ecosystems:

Polkadot
MakerDAO
ENS
Safe DAO
Optimism

* How many delegates does each project have?
* What are the stats of Delegate involvement (i.e. voting, percentage of token supply delegated, number of proposals voted on)
* Can we describe a ‘standard’ model of Delegation? (what is it? What are the repeating features/processes?)
* How does the process transition from off-chain to on-chain?
* Are there compromises made because there are still limited on-chain capabilities on Ethereum/Polkadot? (i.e. are there things that could clearly improve in the future)
* Is anyone doing something surpising with Delegates?
* How did each DAO ‘track’ 'host' and communicate about Delegate involvement? (i.e with tooling etc)
* Are delegates compensated? If yes, what does this process look like? How much are they compensated?
* What is your assessment of the interfaces/tooling that community members can use to elect Delegates (i.e. ease for token holders to delegate, ease for delegates, how much do these interfaces effect the utilization of Delegates - i.e. SafeDAO has a kind of non optional Delegation)
* What are the downsides that can be observed related to Delegation has created (i.e. election of Delegates equivalent to a popularity contest on Twitter, Delegates not participating, just voting with the crowd instead of diligently considering each proposal, Delegates becoming aligned with factions or Groups, Delegates voting in the way that was most likely to get them elected, Delegates not being experts on or understanding what they were voting on
* What are the noticable benefits that Delegation had on the DAO?

ENDs

## 2023-03-07

1. Improvements to our governance process (you should all have received the invite to the Google Doc with our suggestions so far)

2. Dates for discussing OpenGov

## 2023-02-28
- Marketing of Index token in regards to its governance process
- Guiding question: what do we really want and expect from our LTH
- go through list and evaluate each one

blocktower full participation
fintech collective participate where necessary
parafi delegate write on the forum
phillip & maex
fabric maybe
mark syctale

## 2023-02-21
- Updates on batched proposals
- Next upcoming proposals (EVM, Index Fund)
- List for 'active contributors'
- Planning the governance refactor

## 2023-02-15
**Founding Docs changes**
- Appendix - levels of engagement

**Batched Votes - To-dos**
- updates. Cassidy?
- Newsletter (tomorrow).
- Tweet storm - tomorrow.

[Whatsup
](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1pkcGYf2Ypf15Ce0qc0d5khVFkXdeRganajMx_wKMV0U/edit#slide=id.g2066a3afb03_3_0)
- Slide on PEG (Cassidy)?
- To do Now

Upcoming proposals -
* Anna - EVM ready to go to RFC by 3 March

* Frederik - Index ready to go to RFC by 3 March (on the technical side it can be independent to how we're pitching it to Aave and many others, it can be used in different ways). The Pool of Pools: How do we use this to generate excitement?

* Technical aspect of Protocol Fees - Cassidy and Miguel (can be worked on from tomorrow) - go live mid March

## 2023-02-07

* Orhan: update on 3 RFCs
* - Governance documentation uploaded to GitHub (PR#420)
* Ivan: Protocol fees ready to be uploaded (deadline until tomorrow): Need confirmation from Jeroen, and Lucas.

Update on comms plan (C/K)
* Blog / twitter storm
* LTH: [draft letter here ](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-6koCeH729tJMJtUxoliXj0zq4UNvOuyIqmx6D5wcng/edit#)- will L/Romina be able to edit it case-by-case for each LTH and send it in best channel?
* * Governance group in telegram for LTH: Jun Sun (Bloccerate joined) other VCs could also join. Documents (tutorial) and RFCs will be posted there when available

Update:
Proposal to David U to help us out with governance comms

GCG questions
* Collators Issues (Delay +increasing rewards): brief update on situation How we should proceed with them?
* Status on proposals on GitHub?

### CP Framework Refactor

1. Centrifuge Governance Process Refactor
- [ ] Have first feedback call with Lucas, C, K in sync 3.03
- [ ] Start feedback and discovery (O, I)
- [ ] Another call with anyone who has made a proposal (C, K, Asad, Jeroen, Lucas, I, O)
- [ ] Write amended CP framework proposal with changes
- [ ] Review by David G
- [ ] iterations and "practicing" i.e. do a dry run
- [ ] Post amended CP as RFC end of April

## 2023-01-31
### L,K,C
* Any comments on RAPs/roles?

### Gov
* Batched votes [comms plan](https://hackmd.io/9xjQFtJxTbKBOWuHuG952g)- discuss
* LTH - outreach (TGs vs Slack, delegation)
* [PE Group](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vELAacRYkJbaxwbmawCzdI9LVIuArqbvSt4OQgXXSj4/edit#)

If time:
* Grants and community budget - direction

## 2023-01-17
* Focus: how can governance help our current short term goals?
All DAO and Governance priorities need to support Centrifuge goals as much as possible - e.g. BT thriving, TVL increases and current investment raise.
How will our list of priorities do that?

Key question: What are the needs for tooling?

Short term:
Notifications - TG bot (copy the Aave one), Slack notification channel + Bot, Google Cal
Long term: Portal/Front end

We are at the limits of what our Governance can handle - i.e. people's ability to handle the process, voting, all the proposals. Now is the time to stabilise what we've done (including Founding Docs) and make incremental improvements.

Protocol fees discussion;
5-8 active participants - bring high level discussion from experts, Kirill knows because he pays in tradfi for many years

Q. For issuers: How do we best assess these fees, how does it compare to what you're paying?

Ask ahead of time
What are the changes, what have we done,

Jake Lynch - L1 - has many opinions
Kevin Chain -
Post on the forum as a reply to the RFC with specific questions
Ping Kirill
Highlight the questions of where we'd like to refine the RFC
Token based questions

What fees borrowers pa

#### KEY GOAL
By making it easier for DAO members to govern, grow and benefit from the protocol we will help increase token holder excitement

Agenda:
* GCG updates : Founding
* Governance Discovery - what are we learning?
* Gov strategy -

## 2022-12-27
* Review for next time - [Kate's RAP - Roles?](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IKxNjTGbsXwArzA_7p7BwwMZFN_QZO0-InlD5763IT0/edit#)
* Opensquare -> signer issue
* Governance Roadmap/Priorities
* 'Challenges and assumptions' brainstorm

## 2022-12-13
* Altair - reducing governance focus (K) - revisit
* Levels of Engagement: discussion, criteria (K:5)
* Review roadmap proposal (L:?)

## 2022-12-13
* How to involve people in our team
* Altair - reducing governance focus (K)

### Sketch of how roadmap & development could work
#### Action Items
- [ ] Cassidy & Lucas discuss with Jeroen, get feedback from Miguel & Anna
- [ ] Feedback on initial proposal from Eli

#### Sketch Proposal
[Moved here](https://centrifuge.hackmd.io/GJZ_x0e-TJicnzQHfV3Yvw?edit)

'how often does the community need to 'approve' a decision'

## 2022-12-06
* Getting more input on the Protocol fees discussion (i.e. the CGC need actual numbers in order to make an RFC) (K:5)
* Kevin Questions about Tinlake Fees
* There is no way to implement fees on Ethereum for now
* Review how we can build more capacity to write proposals (L?)
* Potential sources of capacity:
1) Ensure k/f & CNF can take a more active role in writing smaller proposals
2) Team members in k/f & CNF who joined more recently who were not involved in the genesis of CFG (post coinlist sale)
3) Community Members
* Other ideas
* Keep a list of *would love* to get started ideas
* Treasury Grants Process & Priorities
* Index token
* Product Roadmap Prioritization
* Staking
* Small process tweaks
* Forming a new group in the DAO
* Token Model & Reporting
* Centrifuge Proposal Process (L:?) Update on small details
- [ ] Schedule review

## 2022-11-22
### Checkin Question: What do you think is on or needs to be on the _medium to long term horizon_ for governance?
* Cassidy: How can we learn from ENS onboarding new delegates? How do we get good governance through delegates?
* Lucas: How do we push the CFG token model forward and make it part of the token sale story in 2023? How do we bring more data driven discussion/decisions into the community?
* Kate: Tactical ways

### Token Topics
* Work on Token Model to look at fees
* [CFG Token Primer](https://docs.google.com/document/d/18F_Pi-QMdZX1dEqY8RGMYZEIyQK6ueTDn8N94KWCcjE/edit#)
* Make sure Kevin answers asap
* Goal:
* Reply to parafi by Thursday
* Split up utility post and send over kevin by Friday