Ratified Doc 001 - Factom Governance Document (1.5)

Public: Only invited members may reply

  • Viewed Bedrock Solutions Bedrock Solutions Blockchain Innovation Foundation Blockchain Innovation Foundation Blockrock Mining Blockrock Mining Brian Deery BuildingIM BuildingIM Canonical Ledgers Canonical Ledgers 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 HashnStore HashnStore LayerTech LayerTech Luciap Luciap Matters Matters Multicoin Capital Multicoin Capital Nic R Niels Klomp Nolan Bauer PrestigeIT PrestigeIT Quintilian RewardChain RewardChain Stamp-IT Stamp-IT The Factoid Authority The Factoid Authority VBIF VBIF
  • Not Viewed None

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


Have not voted

Authority Nodes Federate This Federate This

  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .

Timed Discussion

Discussion ended:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Greetings Standing Parties:

The Guides are proposing an update to the Doc 001 to better reflect how the Factom ecosystem has evolved over the past several months. Many of the updates remove language about bootstrapping the ecosystem, as we now have an ongoing governance system in place. It also expands some language from the guides to the standing parties, which includes ANOs now. It also now better reflects the new ANO election process previously ratified.


>>> This comparison
shows the changes between the current version and the proposed v1.5.
This link will be updated if any changes are made during the discussion period.

The suggested changes and rationale are detailed in this spreadsheet.

The draft v1.5 google doc is located here.


There were some historical processes that got us here.
The version 1.4 ratification was here.
The archive of historical documents is here.

The main Document 001 is here, and it shows some of the collaboration that resulted in the the v1.5 which is up for ratification. If the updates pass ratification, the changes will be ported to this main document.

There was an earlier timed discussion thread, but there was little feedback at that time. This reposting is to have it conform to doc 002, the "Administration of Governance and Community Documents"

This is far from a finalized governance document, and there are a few changes already planned for v1.6. Please post suggestions for 1.6 here as well.

If you have any feedback or suggestions, please post the suggestions in this thread instead of on the google document.
 

Chappie

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

Guides and 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, Guides will vote first and 4 must vote yes otherwise the process ends. If 4 do vote yes, ANOs then 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
David Chapman 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.
 
Hi Brian,

Thank you for the work that has gone into this evolution of our most fundamental governance document.

I understand that this is a living document and that it will evolve over time. Given that you have asked for comments through this forum I have some observations below which are intended as constructive:

2.3.1 processes to elect and remove a guide are supplemented by Doc 100. Should this not be governed or defined?

The later clause in 2.3.1 could be simplified as:

(Upon completion of the necessary infrastructure to enable on-chain elections this and other relevant governance and community documents shall be amended)

2.4.2 Could be simplified to: Guide grants may be adjusted because of workload, FCT price and other factors.

3 Could be edited to: Metrics may or may not include and are not limited to the future criteria below.

3.1 Elections

Elections are the process by which applicants are invited to and consequently publish their desire/capability...

3.2 Campaign documents

3.2.1 Do we require an applicant to publish a campaign document or do we require them to;
  • Make a factomize post
  • Answer specified questions
  • Answer ad-hoc questions

3.3.2 Could be simplified to: The process whereby an ANO election is conducted will be decided, defined and ratified in Doc 154, external to this document.

There could be an additional clause: The matrix of factors and their weightings will be decided, defined and ratified external to this document.


3.3.7 Standing Parties

Could be simplified to: The Standing Parties will ultimately decide on ANO selection. To do this they will evaluate objective/technical factors and subjective factors. They will make this evaluation by reading the associated documents as well as researching and analyzing other difficult to quantify variables such as team, structure, business plan and budget. Certain aspects of this evaluation may be delegated to specialists (such as technically oriented Guides).

3.5 Authorities Independence
Should we not say: Independence will be socially enforced through the ANO election and removal process.

4.2 The Grant Approval Process mentions a minimum score of 60% whereas the paragraph governing the ANO election process which has a similar criteria does not.

4.3 This repeats the 60% score and could be simplified.

4.3.2 Sunset

This makes reference to a historical date of 2018 Q3.

4.5 Guide remuneration
Why specify a particular amount? Should we not leave this open and just refer to the criteria and methodology for determining guide remuneration?

6 Standing parties

This section seems to become a discussion rather than a formulated piece of guidance.

6.2.1.3.2

This makes reference to a historical date of 2018 Q2.
 

CryptoLogic

Crypto Logic
We think it would be best to vote for this version as it is, and include the new changes in the next version instead. There are a lot of inaccuracies in the document, but including too many changes in one version will make it hard to properly evaluate the changes. Already now 1.5 has a lot of amendments.

We have looked at the document and the changes seems good to us. One thing that has not maybe been properly discussed are moving away from the 65 ANOS by 2020 goal. It is obvious that the goal it will not be met, and with this low FCT price we should not strive to do so either. But should it be replaced with another goal or another text instead? (3.4.3 deletion).
 
We think it would be best to vote for this version as it is, and include the new changes in the next version instead. There are a lot of inaccuracies in the document, but including too many changes in one version will make it hard to properly evaluate the changes. Already now 1.5 has a lot of amendments.

We have looked at the document and the changes seems good to us. One thing that has not maybe been properly discussed are moving away from the 65 ANOS by 2020 goal. It is obvious that the goal it will not be met, and with this low FCT price we should not strive to do so either. But should it be replaced with another goal or another text instead? (3.4.3 deletion).
The overarching goal we were going for here was to treat this more as a constitution. There would be other community documents that would reference this one, but we were trying to simplify it more than update it. We now have more process type documents that define more of these kinds of things, and removing specifics in 001 in favor of the other documents was a goal. With removing rather than updating being the modus operandi, that aspiration got cut rather than rescheduled.
 
Hi Brian,

Thank you for the work that has gone into this evolution of our most fundamental governance document.

I understand that this is a living document and that it will evolve over time. Given that you have asked for comments through this forum I have some observations below which are intended as constructive:

2.3.1 processes to elect and remove a guide are supplemented by Doc 100. Should this not be governed or defined?

The later clause in 2.3.1 could be simplified as:

(Upon completion of the necessary infrastructure to enable on-chain elections this and other relevant governance and community documents shall be amended)

2.4.2 Could be simplified to: Guide grants may be adjusted because of workload, FCT price and other factors.

3 Could be edited to: Metrics may or may not include and are not limited to the future criteria below.

3.1 Elections

Elections are the process by which applicants are invited to and consequently publish their desire/capability...

3.2 Campaign documents

3.2.1 Do we require an applicant to publish a campaign document or do we require them to;
  • Make a factomize post
  • Answer specified questions
  • Answer ad-hoc questions

3.3.2 Could be simplified to: The process whereby an ANO election is conducted will be decided, defined and ratified in Doc 154, external to this document.

There could be an additional clause: The matrix of factors and their weightings will be decided, defined and ratified external to this document.


3.3.7 Standing Parties

Could be simplified to: The Standing Parties will ultimately decide on ANO selection. To do this they will evaluate objective/technical factors and subjective factors. They will make this evaluation by reading the associated documents as well as researching and analyzing other difficult to quantify variables such as team, structure, business plan and budget. Certain aspects of this evaluation may be delegated to specialists (such as technically oriented Guides).

3.5 Authorities Independence
Should we not say: Independence will be socially enforced through the ANO election and removal process.

4.2 The Grant Approval Process mentions a minimum score of 60% whereas the paragraph governing the ANO election process which has a similar criteria does not.

4.3 This repeats the 60% score and could be simplified.

4.3.2 Sunset

This makes reference to a historical date of 2018 Q3.

4.5 Guide remuneration
Why specify a particular amount? Should we not leave this open and just refer to the criteria and methodology for determining guide remuneration?

6 Standing parties

This section seems to become a discussion rather than a formulated piece of guidance.

6.2.1.3.2

This makes reference to a historical date of 2018 Q2.

This is good stuff Mike. Thank you. Lets look into these in the next update.
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
Alistair McLeay 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.
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
The motion to end the discussion has passed.

The final poll is available for Guides to vote on now for 3 days. If Guides pass the vote with 4 "Yes" votes then ANOs will be able to vote. If Guides fail to pass, there will be no further action.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top