[DAO:f268b7d] Term limits for Grant Support Squad ( DRAFT )

by 0xed0e0cb94f60f72ec94bef848f5df4cbd365af1d (DuelArena)

Linked Pre-Proposal

Should We Set Term Limits for Grant Support Squad?


Implement term limits for the Grant Support Squad to ensure accountability, foster fresh perspectives, and promote transparency and impartiality in decision-making processes within the Decentraland community.


This proposal advocates for the implementation of term limits and regularly scheduled elections for the Grant Support Squad in Decentraland. By introducing term limits, the Squad can avoid potential issues such as a lack of accountability, stagnation of ideas, and a disconnect from the community’s needs. This framework aims to promote fairness, diversity, and effectiveness in the decision-making processes of the Grant Support Squad.


The absence of term limits for the Grant Support Squad in Decentraland can lead to several potential issues. Without a set duration, accountability may be compromised, fresh perspectives may be lacking, and concerns about impartiality may arise. Furthermore, the lack of term limits could discourage democratic participation and result in a disconnection between the Squad and the community it serves. To address these concerns, implementing term limits is crucial.

  • Maximum Term Duration: Set a Maximum duration of 1 year for each term served by a member of the Grant Support Squad.
  • Term Limits and Reapplication: Specify the number of consecutive terms a member can serve on the Grant Support Squad before they must reapply for their position. For instance, after two consecutive terms, members must reapply and compete with other qualified candidates to ensure a fair selection process.
  • Rotation Schedule: Implement a regular rotation schedule for the Grant Support Squad. Determine the frequency of elections and rotations to ensure a consistent influx of new members and prevent stagnation within the Squad.
  • Transparency in Selection Process: Establish transparent criteria and guidelines for selecting new members of the Grant Support Squad. This can include qualifications, experience, and a fair evaluation process to ensure that the most suitable individuals are chosen.
  • Community Engagement: Encourage community participation and input in the selection process. Consider allowing community members to nominate candidates or provide feedback on potential candidates to ensure that the Grant Support Squad represents the diverse interests and perspectives of the Decentraland community.
  • Term Evaluation:In addition to conducting periodic evaluations of the performance of Grant Support Squad (GSS) members during their terms, it is crucial to establish a transparent and accountable process for their selection and continued service. To ensure accountability and maintain the trust of the community, it is recommended that GSS members be subject to a voting process for a one-year term.


Elections & Vote of Confidence

At the end of the six-month mark within the one-year term, a vote of confidence through a poll should be held to evaluate the ongoing suitability of the GSS member in their role. This vote of confidence serves as an opportunity for the community to assess the member’s performance, effectiveness, and alignment with the community’s best interests. By conducting this vote, the community can make an informed decision about the member’s continuation in the GSS, ensuring that only individuals who consistently contribute to the goals of the Decentraland project remain in positions of responsibility.

Reason for conducting the vote of confidence: The vote of confidence allows the community to actively participate in the evaluation process and voice their opinions regarding the performance and effectiveness of GSS members. It serves as a mechanism to address any concerns, maintain transparency, and ensure that the appointed individuals are consistently working in the best interests of the community. This process helps to maintain a high standard of accountability and fosters trust within the Decentraland project.


Implementing term limits for the Grant Support Squad in Decentraland is necessary to address potential issues such as a lack of accountability, fresh perspectives, and trust in the decision-making processes. By introducing term limits, the community can foster fairness, diversity, and transparency in the Grant Support Squad, ensuring it remains responsive, accountable, and effective over the long term. This proposal aims to promote a healthier and more inclusive governance process within the Decentraland community

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot


Hmm… Why does this feel like a “revenge” move for whatever is happening with duel arena? I’d like to see it as an impartial draft proposal but its hard to ignore that the main author to this proposal is an entity that has just recently gotten into an unresolved conflict with the GSS. Feels very politically motivated and not a good perception even though there are good intentions.

If I’m not mistaken @3Point1Four, this is not the first time this has been brought up. Aside from that this is something that is needed regardless of motive. I’m glad to see it come up finally. I assume the details will be next if this passes to the next stage.

Hey Recently it is true that I have personally experienced some things. I already shared in the forums but you can also see on the previous proposal that I had commented that it was a very good idea, Right now I am just putting it forward to draft just because of I have personally experienced that its responsible to have accountability over trust.

It doesn’t mean that the GSS wont be necessary anymore, but rather we want to make sure that everything is going smoothly and wont be done irretional to also have some safety for grantees.

We want to grow together as a community and fix every minor flaw in order to have a smooth process and nice time in the DAO. I don’t like the word revenge since all I do is trying to help.

Hey @InJesterr, I have no qualms with the proposal, and I also have nothing against you. My opinion is that having duel arena or yourself author this proposal may be perceived as “revenge” in light of how things are unfolding, even though u may not mean it as such. Under such contentious circumstances, it would be better to allow a neutral party to author it to prevent any potential rise of disputes down the road.

IMO implemeting term limits for GSS make sense, I also supported this type of initiative before on GSS poll and on other Committees.

For example,
Accountability Committee has them:

I think revenge would apply if the proposal was mean, I think that you think that we want to destabilize the GSS while we just want to set term limits. I dont understand your definition of revenge because its not like I am here trying to do something bad.

We already voted on this topic. I don’t think we should be bringing up the same topic again if we already voted on it… this should be an invalid proposal. I believe we also have rules against previously rejected proposals being brought up again?

Hey @CheddarQueso the previous proposal passed so I promoted just to draft :smiley:

1 Like

This sounds like it is saying that theoretically GSS members can have unlimited terms as long as they re-apply and are reselected from the applicant pool. If that’s the case, I’m for it but I don’t believe the people with the experience and first-hand knowledge should be replaced for the sake of fresh blood. I like something that gives new applicants an equal chance of being chosen, but in a way that still allows the “current” members to be chosen if they are truly the best for the job.

1 Like

Yeah. That is my understanding.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting change for the sake of change is good, but it is important that we establish a process to make sure everyone who is qualified gets an equal opportunity to apply for these roles. Otherwise it risks becoming centralized and creating an environment where who you know instead of a meritocracy.

Personally I think any squad deemed to be important enough to be a “core unit” of the dao should be a committee and each member should be considered individually and not as a group, but that doesn’t mean the people who pioneered the roles should be punished simply for the sake of change.

Hmmm… I can see pros and cons to this.

We don’t stay stagnant with new ideas
We give opportunities to new applicants
We have a way to rotate out squad members who may not be performing their duties
We may be more decentralized (this is not a guarantee)

1 year is not a lot of time to become proficient at your job
Rotating out for new applicants to have a turn doesn’t seem like the best reasoning
There’s a large amount of work to go through the rehiring process on a regular basis
During overlap periods, we would have less experience to rely on

My mind goes to “traditional” jobs, what do they do? In a normal job, do we have to reapply for our job every year? Do we have to reapply every 3 years? If we’re qualified, isn’t that enough? How long are terms in public service jobs? In a professional career, I would say it takes 2-3 years to attain a proficient level of experience. I would suggest the terms are 2-3 years before having to reapply. This would allow for enough time to gain the necessary skills to do the job, but would allow our community a way to remove GSS members who are unable to fulfill the expectations of the job (and allow a safety net for the community to remove GSS members in the case that they are misusing their authority).

Voting no for now, because I think 1 year is too short and would create an excess of work to constantly be going through a reapplication procedure. I would support a term of 2-3 years before they have to reapply.


Actually, The GSS isn’t working for a boss, when you work independant you can be not hired for the same job you did last year I see it like this and even for the job I dont know how it is in the USA but yes you have to reapply in a year and based of your performance in the first month they can say that you are eligble for the job. ofcourse it means that you could lose your job but if you did good enough you are the most credible person to do it.

1 Like

Term limits for Grant Support Squad ( DRAFT )

This proposal is now in status: PASSED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes 70% 7,951,420 VP (58 votes)
  • No 30% 3,490,394 VP (55 votes)
  • Abstain 0% 0 VP (0 votes)