Amendment Batched Amendment - Removal of Guides from Governance

Public: Only invited members may reply

  • Viewed Bedrock Solutions Bedrock Solutions BlockVenture Blockchain Innovation Foundation Blockchain Innovation Foundation Blockrock Mining Blockrock Mining Consensus Networks Consensus Networks CryptoLogic CryptoLogic Cube3 Cube3 DBGrow DBGrow De Facto De Facto Factom Inc Factom Inc Factomatic Factomatic Factomize Factomize Factoshi Factoshi Federate This Federate This Go Immutable HashQuark HashnStore HashnStore Kompendium Kompendium LayerTech LayerTech Luciap Luciap PrestigeIT PrestigeIT RewardChain RewardChain Stamp-IT Stamp-IT The Factoid Authority The Factoid Authority VBIF VBIF WB
  • Not Viewed None

Should the document be ratified or amended as specified by the thread type?


Have not voted

Authority Nodes BlockVenture DBGrow DBGrow

  • Total voters
    21
  • Poll closed .

Timed Discussion

Discussion ended:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello everyone,

Following the successful ratification of Doc 002 to allow for Batched Amendments, the Governance Working Group is releasing its first batch of documents pertaining to the removal of Guides. A ratification of these 11 documents will effectively remove all Guide mentions from governance and important processes formerly carried out by Guides have been altered where feasible.

A few examples include:

1. Gatekeeping for a removal procedure has been removed. All ANOs are immediately included in the discussion. The Emergency Suspension becomes an optional part of each removal procedure, needing a majority Standing Party vote within the first 24 hours.
2. Standing Parties vote on the final FCT amount for each grant round.
3. A lot of announcements have been redirected to either Standing Parties with implied authority, Initiators of certain procedures and/or generic automated bots. Provisions are in place to cover situations where automation isn't available or is failing.

Apart from Guide-related changes, several documents have also received a few quality-of-life updates. Nothing too contentious, in most cases this is just added clarity or a simplification of processes.

A few examples include:

1. The Website Committee formation has been revamped to be in line with doc 006. There are no more FCT holder and ANO member elections. The Website Committee is now able to manage multiple Websites, with one Grantor added per Website managed.
2. Incubent Testnet admins can now have their terms automatically extended if there are no candidates. Elections moved from 6 months to 12 months.

For a full list of changes, with a clear overview of each document, click here.

NOTE: All listed document amendments are subject to a single vote in this Timed Discussion thread. Changes have purposely been kept as non-contentious as possible for this very reason. If you have any concerns, please utilize the 8-day discussion period effectively.
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
This thread is a Document Ratification/Amendment Timed Discussion and I am designed to help facilitate efficient communication.

ANOs may take part in this discussion and vote. Unless this discussion is ended early or extended, it will end in 8 days after which a vote will take place. After 18 hours from the start of the thread or any point up until 24 hours are left in the discussion, you can make a motion to end the discussion immediately or extend the discussion beyond it's initial time frame by selecting the pertinent button at the top of this thread. If someone "seconds" your motion, a poll will take place which requires a majority of Standing Parties to vote one way or the other.

At the end of the discussion period, ANOs vote and if 60% vote yes, the document is successfully ratified or amended.
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
We are now 18 hours into the discussion. You may now make a motion to extend this Document Ratification/Amendment Discussion by an additional 72 hours or end this conversation by selecting the pertinent button at the top of this thread. This option will end when there are 24 hours left in the discussion.
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
Anton Ilzheev has made a motion to end the discussion early. If someone seconds this motion by selecting the button below, a vote on the motion will start.

A majority voting yay will pass the motion and the discussion will end immediately. This motion will remain open until the normal discussion period ends or a motion to end the discussion is passed by a majority.
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
Miguel Proulx has seconded the motion to end the discussion early.

A motion is now active at the top of this thread to vote if you want to end the discussion early and move on the next phase. A majority voting yes will pass the motion and the discussion will be closed immediately. This vote will remain open until the normal discussion period ends or another motion is passed.
 

CryptoLogic

Crypto Logic
Thank you Factoshi and WB for putting documents up for approval.

got one issue with doc 107 (grant process) in 4.3.1. It state that vote for final grant amount must complete before conclusion of grant round and that would be wrong as it is concluded by funds being paid out. It has to be concluded prior to voting period starts (19 days prior payout in table 4.2). Also what happens if this does not happen? Is grant round automatically cancelled?
 
Thank you Factoshi and WB for putting documents up for approval.

got one issue with doc 107 (grant process) in 4.3.1. It state that vote for final grant amount must complete before conclusion of grant round and that would be wrong as it is concluded by funds being paid out. It has to be concluded prior to voting period starts (19 days prior payout in table 4.2). Also what happens if this does not happen? Is grant round automatically cancelled?
Doc107 para 4.3.1 says that the amount to be paid out will be calculated and approved via Standing party vote. It is difficult to be precise about the amount for a number of reasons and so there has always been a contingency to ensure there is sufficient available to disburse.

Doc107 para 4.3.1 also says that a vote to approve the final amount must be completed prior to the conclusion of the grant round. According to table 4.2 you are right that it needs to be concluded 19 days before the end. The logic for this is that the cut-off for grants is driven by this which will influence voters.

Should a vote for the amount not be agreed then it is difficult to see the grant round continuing.

From your perspective would you prefer the above two points to be made explicit in Doc107?
 
Thanks @CryptoLogic for reviewing the documents. I think your discovery of doc 107 is accurate and I would suggest we edit it to reflect available FCT be approved prior to voting, not round closure.

As for what to do should the standing parties not approve the available FCT? I would assume the round is determined invalid due to lack of agreement on the available FCT. Without Guides, ANOs need to step up and take a little more responsibility in this. By next round I suspect we will have a cleaned up ability to determine the grant pool amount that can be independently audited with relative ease by the standing parties so it will only require verification and approval.

I’ll make the edits today to doc 107 reflecting the correct timeline for approval of final grant pool amount.
 
I updated Doc 107 to reflect grant round amount must be determined and approved prior to grant round voting commencing:

The amount of Factoids to be issued at the conclusion of the grant round will be determined by the Standing Parties through automation or by any appointed individual and a vote to approve the final amount must be completed prior to grant round voting commencing.
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
The motion to end the discussion has passed.

Discussion has ended and the final vote is now open. It will last for 72 hours. Please take the time to vote accordingly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top