[BIP-20] Reduce Governance Time

This simple proposal aims to reduce the time concepts must take to reach voting.

The current requirement for a concept to reach voting is 21 days

  • Concepts must remain for 7 days and then be moved by staff after satisfying other requirements.

  • BIP must remain for 7 days and then be moved by staff to snapshot.

  • Votes must remain in the snapshot for 7 days.

To change that, I propose the following changes to the BIP process.

  • Reduce Concepts minimum to 7 days

  • Reduce BIPs minimum to 3 days

  • Keep voting periods the same at 7 days minimum.

This will reduce the overall time required for a proposal from 21 days to 17.

The reasoning behind reducing the time required for BIPs is that they are required to meet criteria and format before moving onto BIPs, BIPs usually already meet requirements and do not have many changes to have made. Reducing the time for voting too much is undesired as it gives less time for people to vote on an issue that being said if a proposer wanted a vote to stay longer than 7 days they are allowed to request such.


21 is way too long; I am all for this

agreed that 21 is too long but maybe three days on the forum is too short. i might not see things in that timeframe.

It would be 5 days minimum with both concept and BIP

I personally don’t feel there is a need to change the governance times.

1 week for each stage gives enough time for the community to see and react to messages. Not all concepts are easy to understand so it can take time for the community to ask questions or research parts they need to in order to contribute to the discussion. Additionally, most planning is done well in advance of implementing, so there shouldn’t be a need to rush discussions.

If there is a requirement for moving quickly, the council of guardians (multisig) have the ability to use their judgement to post an accelerated proposal.

I know that Galaxy members may expedite proposals but non-galaxy members cant, I also feel like this encourages more participation as someone who would want to participate won’t have to wait near a month to see their proposal be implemented.

I feel the minimum time reduction is balanced regardless of the fact that a Galaxy member must endorse or review it for it to move forward and the creators may allow the post to stay longer.

I still feel the time should be reduced to lower the bar a little bit, do you have different times you’d propose?

If a governance proposal by someone who is not a guardian needs to be expedited, it could be done by having a guardian sponsoring the proposal.

Many DAO lately such as Reflexer Labs expedited votes within a few days. Having short delays, coupling with a bear market and conditions where in a bear market, attaining quorum could be hard makes expedited vote risky.

It may feels slow, but it gives everyone plenty of time to think about a proposal, answer and vote accordingly.

I would personally vote for the status quo.

I stated in the past that I would be Ok with reducing the time it is in a BIP state.

If a compromise could be met, I would suggest :

Concept : Keeping it at 7 days
BIP : 3 days
Vote : 7 days

I am wondering if by proposing this we are changing just for changing or will it have an effect. With almost all proposals coming from guardians, I don’t see which benefits we could have right now to shorten the time.

Not sure what this will accomplish besides the governance process feeling more rushed.

I could align with Baowolfs suggestion of reducing the BIP time to 3 days. Most of the discussion happens during the concept phase, which is one of the reasons I think it should stay at 7 days. Giving DAO members 7 days to process and give feedback is a good baseline.

As I said, to try and make governance less daunting for people who may want to contribute/put forth proposals but do not want to commit a month.

I want every chance for more of and to make contribution more welcoming.

I don’t think governance time is what prevents members to put forward proposals.

Complex product, tokenomics and DeFi understanding is probably the barrier. I worked in the past with @zfogg last year for a Rhino Tokenomic overhaul on BSC. The complexity, checks and balances and fairness in proposing upgrades in protocols require a lot of work and forward thinking.

It is not impossible though and I offered my help to many DAO members willing to write proposals in the past such as @Cookies and @Varyints

The major constraint from turning a concept into a BIP is in my eyes that some concept could not be applied or build as it stands. But it’s the responsibility of the governance galaxy to help DAO members turn their ideas into BIP that could be executed.

I certainly think that if someone wanted to add something and was told they’d have to go through a process like this as well on top of it requiring 21+ days to see it happen could certainly be dissuading to someone. And there has been approval and engagement from the community regarding this BIP.

That being said, halving the governance time, could also be too radical of a choice all at once. And I agree that most of the important parts of a proposal’s life should be in the concept phase.

Concept : 7 days
BIP : 3 days
Vote : 7 days

Seems like a reasonable first step to reducing governance time and if needed can be altered again in the future.