Link to ideation post in the forum: https://forum.shapeshift.com/t/ideation-scp-167-update-snapshot-space-and-delegate-authority-to-admins-to-update-in-the-future/2935
Link to RFC post in the forum, which has more context on each change: https://forum.shapeshift.com/t/rfc-update-snapshot-space-and-delegate-authority-to-admins-to-update-in-the-future/2921
Summary
This proposal seeks approval from the community to make the following updates to the shapeshiftdao.eth SnapShot space:
- Ratify the recent increase of FOX voting power required to publish a proposal to
50,000 200,000 FOX
- Replace ShapeShift’s current SnapShot admins, who were appointed prior to the DAO launch, with the moderation workstream leader and treasury signers
- Officially delegate authority to the SnapShot admins to be able to modify certain settings in ShapeShift’s SnapShot space without requiring an additional proposal
- Create a new SnapShot sub-space for the Ideation stage of the governance process
- Set the voting period to 5 days for the main SnapShot space and to 7 days for the Ideation space
Abstract
Currently ShapeShift’s governance process depends heavily on SnapShot. Prior to the DAO’s launch, 4 foxes were appointed as SnapShot admins to get the ball rolling with the understanding that the community could make a proposal to replace or remove these admins in the future. Since then, a moderation workstream has been established, a process for electing treasury signers has been implemented, and several malicious proposals have been published with the intent of phishing FOX voters. In light of these developments, this proposal seeks to ratify the following changes to the shapeshiftdao.eth SnapShot:
- Ratify the recent increase of FOX voting power required to publish a proposal to
50,000 200,000 FOX
Specification: Required voting power to publish a proposal has already been increased to 200,000 to prevent the ongoing spam attacks. This simply ratifies this change.
Motivation: Mitigate ongoing attacks and the risk of community members falling victim to scams.
Drawbacks: This unfortunately has the unintended consequence of raising the barrier for community members to publish bonafide proposals. However, several community members have already offered to provide assistance and publish proposals on behalf of those that don’t have the necessary voting power. As mentioned, the community should consider additional or separate requirements to further defend against this exploit going forward.
- Replace ShapeShift’s current SnapShot admins with the moderation workstream leader and treasury signers
Specification:
A transaction will be created to remove the current SnapShot admins and moderator and add the current treasury signers and moderation workstream leader as the new admins.
Moderation worktream leader: Giantkin.eth (0xff75E131c711e4310C045317779d39B3B4f718C4)
Treasury signer #1: 0xF5AA59151bE6515C4Ca68A0282CF68B3eA4846fC
Treasury signer #2: 0x7a89f1838933DE0bA50aF0e916050977ceACAC9e
Treasury signer #3: 0x8984476627010f0f50F1903f63BbdBe1176c5297
Motivation: Align SnapShot admins with current treasury signers and moderation workstream leader, and avoid requiring a future proposal to update admins if these roles change hands.
Drawbacks: This isn’t necessarily a drawback, but important to understand that each SnapShot admin’s account has the power to act beyond the community’s consent and in a worst case scenario, delete past proposals and prevent new proposals from being published and/or voted on by FOX holders. It’s important that admins are individuals that the community trusts to not abuse these powers as well as to secure their keys so they aren’t compromised.
- Officially delegate authority to the SnapShot admins to be able to modify certain settings in ShapeShift’s SnapShot space without requiring an additional proposal
Specification: SnapShot admins will be granted authority to add strategies as long as the strategy grants 1 vote for 1 fox, no more no less, as well as authority to remove strategies that are no longer relevant, such as FOX deposited into Rari pools or the Tokemak FOX reactor, both of which have been sunset. Further, the ShapeShift treasury signers will be granted authority to execute the necessary transactions to add or remove SnapShot admins as long as each admin is either a treasury signer or the moderation workstream leader.
Motivation: This will free up space for new strategies as ShapeShift’s space is already at the max capacity of 8.
Drawbacks: those who still have FOX deposited into a Rari pool, Tokemak reactor, or a future chain or defi protocol that gets sunset will lose their corresponding voting power.
- Create a new SnapShot sub-space for the Ideation stage of the governance process
Specification: If this proposal passes, a new space would be created called ShapeShift Ideation where Ideation proposals could be published. The ShapeShift Ideation space would be added as a sub-space to the main shapeshiftdao.eth space and would have all of the same settings as the main space, and the governance process would be updated to require that Ideation proposals are published and voted on in the Ideation space.
Motivation: Have a dedicated space to review and vote on Ideation proposals, minimize redundancy in the main SnapShot space (which can lead to confusion or voter apathy for less active community members), and keep the main SnapShot space focused on proposals that have passed Ideation and have a greater likelihood of being refined and passing.
Drawbacks: Changes in the governance process can cause confusion for those accustomed to the current process. This will also make Ideation proposals less visible. It also adds an additional space for the SnapShot admins to manage.
- Set the voting period to 5 days for the main SnapShot space and to 7 days for the Ideation space
Specification: Both the main snapshot space and ideation sub-space would be configured to require 5 day and 7 day voting periods respectively.
Motivation: Simplify the process of making a proposal and eliminate the potential for a valid ideation proposal to be active indefinitely.
Drawbacks: This would remove the ability to create proposals with custom voting periods.
Voting
For: Approve all changes
Against: Reject all changes
