[DAO:84ac82e] Veto Procedure - DAO Council

Governance
1

by 0x5b5cc427c1d81db4f94de4d51d85ce122d63e244 (Fehz)

SUMMARY
The DAO Council’s veto procedure is a two-phase process that includes an internal Council vote followed by a public phase in which DAO members can exercise their veto power on Council-approved decisions.

ABSTRACT
The proposed veto procedure establishes checks and balances within DAO governance. First, the DAO Council will vote internally to approve major decisions. Then, the community will have the ability to challenge those decisions through a Veto Proposal mechanism. This ensures both efficiency in decision-making and strong safeguards for DAO-wide legitimacy.

MOTIVATION
The veto mechanism introduced in the Proposal for Establishing a Council for Decentraland DAO allowed the community to challenge Council decisions by enabling a veto governance proposal within two weeks of a decision’s publication. While this safeguarded against misaligned decisions, it could impose unnecessary bureaucratic burdens on both the DAO and the Council. The process proved to be overly complex, slow, and lacked a clear, streamlined execution path.

Introducing a clearer and more straightforward procedure, directly integrated into the Governance App, will reduce friction and ensure more predictable decision-making.

SPECIFICATION

Phase 1: Internal Council Vote
For major decisions such as approving the Executive Branch mandate planning, budgeting, and treasury management strategies, the DAO Council will first conduct an internal vote using a Snapshot space with restricted access.

  • Each Council member has one vote (1 member = 1 vote).
  • A simple majority (3 out of 5 votes) is required to approve a decision.
  • The voting window lasts 48 hours.
  • Any Council member can initiate a vote by creating a Snapshot proposal.

Phase 2: DAO Veto
Once a Council decision is approved and published in the Governance App (feat: Add council decision veto proposal type by ncomerci · Pull Request #1902 · decentraland/governance · GitHub), it is also announced through the DAO’s official communication channels to ensure visibility and awareness.

From the moment the decision is made public, there is a **14-day window **during which any community member can submit a Veto Proposal, a special proposal category intended solely to challenge Council decisions.

  • Once a Veto Proposal is submitted, the original decision is placed on hold (“frozen period”) until the veto vote concludes.
  • Veto Proposal voting is live for 7 days, and the decision stays on hold for that period.
  • If the Veto Proposal is rejected, the Council decision becomes immediately binding and may be executed by the Executive Arm.
  • If the Veto Proposal is approved, the Council decision is nullified. The Council may then revise and resubmit the decision.

To prevent spam:

  • A minimum of 1M Voting Power (VP) is required to submit a Veto Proposal, representing a minimum of 1% of the total votable supply.
  • A threshold of 6M VP is required for the proposal to pass.

IMPACTS

  • Establishes a clear and accessible process for challenging Council decisions.
  • Increases transparency and predictability in governance.
  • Accelerates the timeline for both the DAO and the Council to reach final outcomes.
  • Enhances the legitimacy and acceptance of Council decisions.

IMPLEMENTATION PATHWAYS

  1. Governance App Update: Implement the Veto Proposal category.
  2. Snapshot Configuration: Establish restricted Council voting space.
  3. Communication Protocol: Define official channels for publishing decisions and alerts.

CONCLUSIONS
The Veto Procedure balances efficiency and accountability in DAO governance. It grants the Council authority to make decisions while empowering the community with oversight mechanisms. By adopting this process, the DAO enhances transparency, trust, and resilience against governance risks.

  • FOR
  • AGAINST
  • Invalid question/options

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

2

I’m FOR this proposal, but agree with @web3nit that the 1M VP required to submit a Veto proposal is too much. This would only allow “a few” active individuals to submit the proposal. The 6M VP can be debated as well.

2 Likes
3

This is the Pre-Proposal Poll stage, so totally open to discuss and revisit the threshold for submissions. I’d prefer to keep the 6MP VP threshold for the approval though, as it follows the Governance Proposal standard and needs the involvement of both “small” delegates and whales.

4

Why would there be spam when, as per your proposal, only 1 veto proposal per decision is allowed (as after the first proposal is rejected, the decision becomes binding, so all consequent veto proposals are useless.).

I think it might encourage the creation of veto as soon as the decision is done to fast track the enactment from 14 days to 7 days.
It would also cause issues if someone create a dummy veto early on as it would prevent community discussions about the decision.
Several veto should be able to be created during that 14-day window.

1 Like
5

Why would there be spam when, as per your proposal, only 1 veto proposal per decision is allowed (as after the first proposal is rejected, the decision becomes binding, so all consequent veto proposals are useless.).

One individual submitting a veto proposal for each Council decision could also be considered spam and a way to block and stall the decision-making process.

I think it might encourage the creation of veto as soon as the decision is done to fast track the enactment from 14 days to 7 days. It would also cause issues if someone create a dummy veto early on as it would prevent community discussions about the decision.

There’s also a possibility that people who want to delay the decision are incentivized to submit their Veto Proposal just a few hours before the time window closes. That said, I don’t see a problem with leaving the 14-day period as the standard time for execution.

Several veto should be able to be created during that 14-day window.

Open to discuss the implications of this. I see it as an open door for spam proposals and voter fatigue, which is the opposite of what this procedure is looking for.

6

Well I am for this but my vote is not applicable or eligible or something.

image
image655×485 7.1 KB

7

Veto Procedure - DAO Council

This proposal is now in status: PASSED.

Voting Results:

  • For 71% 2,150,636 VP (13 votes)
  • Against 29% 887,566 VP (8 votes)
  • Invalid question/options 0% 0 VP (0 votes)