Adding Temperature Check to Governance Process

[WinVerse]

TL;DR

• We agree there should be a way to gauge sentiment around a proposal.
• This sentiment would serve as a form of temp check for proposals before onchain voting.
• We propose integrating the existing poll function on Discourse as a formalized “Temp Check” process.

Abstract

This proposal suggests integrating Discourse’s poll function as a Temp Check mechanism for gauging initial community sentiment on governance proposals. The goal is to establish a preliminary voting stage prior to advancing proposals to an onchain vote via Tally.

Motivation

A Temp Check is a vital step in the governance process, enabling the community to express early support or concerns about proposals before they reach the onchain voting stage. Without this checkpoint, proposals that lack sufficient backing may still advance, leading to wasted resources and unnecessary onchain votes. This initiative seeks to:

• Streamline governance with a simple, intuitive tool.
• Reduce governance bottlenecks by allowing community feedback at an early stage.
• Avoid unnecessary onchain votes for proposals that lack community support.

Rationale

The choice to use Discourse’s poll feature as the Temp Check mechanism comes from both its simplicity and the community’s preference to avoid integrating additional formal tooling that could hinder governance participation. Discourse already serves as the primary forum for discussions, making it a natural fit for an integrated Temp Check process. By embedding polls directly into proposal threads, this process minimizes the need for additional tools while maintaining transparency.

Specifications

This proposal won’t be submitted to Tally. It would kickstart the experimentation of this process as a poll would be added at the end of this proposal. Delegates would signal suppose or oppose using the poll. For newer proposals, this is what an ideal process would look like:

Process Outline:

1. Proposal Drafting: Proposals will be posted on the Discourse forum in the Proposals section. They should follow the established proposal template, ensuring that all key details are included.
2. Temp Check Poll: When this proposal is added as a topic on Discourse, a simple poll will be embedded within the post to serve as the Temp Check. The poll will consist of two options:
   • Support: Indicating early approval.
   • Oppose: Indicating early disapproval.
3. Poll Duration: The poll will remain open for a minimum of seven days to allow ample time for community feedback.
4. Threshold for Success: For a proposal to proceed to an onchain vote, it must achieve at least >50% support from the Temp Check poll.
5. OnChain Vote: If the Temp Check poll reaches the required threshold, the proposal can proceed to Tally for an onchain vote.

Poll Setup:

• Simple Majority Rule: If at least >50% of participants support the proposal, it moves forward. Otherwise, it will either need modifications or will not advance.
• Transparency: Results will be publicly viewable, maintaining transparency in the governance process.

Steps to Implement

If this proposal is approved, the governance working group will be responsible for:

• Updating the governance documentation to reflect the new Temp Check process.
• Educating the community on how to use the Discourse poll function.
• Monitoring the use of temp checks and gathering feedback to refine the process as needed.

Overall Cost

There are no costs associated with this proposal.

[Jaf]

I love the idea of doing a temperature check!

My only worry is that polls on Discourse are open to anyone who signs up, and that can be a problem if people vote without really getting the topic. Uninformed voters might end up slowing down or even blocking good proposals from moving forward.

Have you come across any ideas on how to deal with this?

[dzonson.eth]

I agree with the general sentiment expressed by @Jaf regarding the value of introducing a Temp Check mechanism to gauge preliminary support. However, I share concerns about potential misuse of such a system if not properly structured. Allowing any user—regardless of their integrity or token holdings—to participate could lead to the creation of artificial sentiment, which might not accurately reflect the broader community’s stance.

Moreover, I question the necessity of implementing this change given our current circumstances. With a proposal passing rate on Tally exceeding 90%, it’s evident that only well-supported proposals make it to the on-chain voting stage. As a smaller DAO, we have the advantage of a tightly-knit community where feedback is already exchanged transparently through regular calls and active forum discussions. These channels provide a solid understanding of community sentiment without the need for an additional formalized process.

Implementing a Temp Check may add a layer of complexity without yielding significant benefits at this stage. Instead, I suggest focusing on enhancing our existing communication channels and ensuring that delegates remain actively engaged in discussions, rather than introducing a process that could potentially slow down governance and add administrative overhead.

That said, if the community feels strongly about integrating this process, I would recommend exploring mechanisms to mitigate potential abuse. For example, incorporating a minimum threshold of token holdings or account age for eligibility to participate in these polls could be one way to preserve the integrity of this Temp Check.

In conclusion, while I see the merits of formalizing community sentiment tracking, I believe that in our current structure, we are not experiencing governance inefficiencies that would necessitate such a change. However, if we choose to move forward, we must do so thoughtfully, with safeguards in place to prevent skewed results and to ensure that Temp Checks add value to our governance process rather than disrupt it.

[cr1st0f]

I’m in favour of a temp check stage although I am against using discourse polls and would encourage you to modify this to be snapshot voting. There’s a lot of tooling built around snapshot which allows notifications (e.g. lighthouse) and summarisation and tracking like x23. It also provides a clear, simple record of votes to look back on and allows token gating to avoid spam. Discourse is great as a forum but in my opinion there are better voting platforms.