[Discussion] Proposal & Voting Rules

Hey everyone! Since there were no more additions to the miro whiteboard, I’ll post what we’ve got so far as an outline for the proposal: 'Proposal & Voting Rules’
I’m posting a [Discussion] since this would be the proper way to do it if we agree on those new rules.
If we do, I’ll post the proposal to be voted on.
Please feel free to point out anything that we might have missed on miro.

Here is also the link to the corresponding [Discussion] on 'Creating subCategories, subCaterory Crews and Roles on Discourse

1. Proposal Purpose:

The main goals for this proposal are to structure and formalize the proposal and voting processes in Discourse:

  • Creating a proposal takes place on Discourse and is intended to have a concise motion to be voted upon.
  • Voting signals participation and helps the community evolve.

2. Grape Proposal Overview:

If accepted, the following will be in effect after the vote closes:


  1. Proposals need to be created on Discourse.
  2. Proposals need to be posted in the correct subCategory.
  3. Each subCategory is managed by the subCategory Crew responsible for organizing and prioritizing the subDAO’s proposals to the DAO (decisions that are not solely within the subDAO’s purview).
  4. There are 3 different types of proposals:
    a. Non-Funding: Any proposal that doesn’t (re)allocate funds or changes the governance structure.
    b. Funding: Any proposal that (re)allocates funds but doesn’t change the governance structure.
    c. Governance: Any proposal that changes the governance structure of the DAO or subDAO.
  5. Each Funding and Governance proposal needs to have a prior [Discussion] thread.
  6. Each proposal with a mandatory [Discussion] thread needs to link to this discussion.
  7. Each proposal intended to be voted upon should be about a single issue.
  8. Each topic can contain more than one proposal.
  9. Each proposal should give the option for an abstention.
  10. Each proposal intended to be voted upon needs to be in [English] or needs to contain a translated abstract.
  11. A proposal shouldn’t be edited or amended once posted; a proposal can’t be edited after the first vote is cast.


  1. The default duration required for a voting period on a proposal to reach completion is 1 week.
  2. The duration of the vote can be extended by the author. This needs to be done before the first vote is cast.
  3. The voting period of Non-Funding proposals can be expedited to 3 days.
  4. A vote is considered viable when at least 10 people voted on it.
  5. Every DOA member has 1 vote per ballot.
  6. Each abstention is counting towards the threshold.
  7. A vote is considered passed when there are more votes for one option than for any other (except abstentions).
  8. A tie is considered a rejection.
  9. Voting against a proposal should be followed by a short reason, if not already given.

3. Stakeholders

GRAPE community, specifically DAO members

4. Costs/Resource Requirements:

GRAPE Community Treasury Management & Execution


This is ofc only a placeholder until we switch to on-chain voting :+1:


I like everything put in here. The only proposal type I feel is not required is Non-Funding. These should just be pushed forward by any member. No need to have votes on this. If a member has an idea or would like the input of the DAO, they can just create a discussion in the relevant subcategory. Everything else included here is great. I also believe that there should be a 1 week duration unless a deadline is specified by the author.

Generally, I’d agree with you. Especially since we try to be as fast as possible with things. But, I’d argue that there may be situations that require a vote, even if there are no funds or governance decisions involved. Let’s say a member wants to approach other projects and thereby represent GRAPE.

There can be cases where a formal proposal is necessary and/or advisable. So having a rule in place doesn’t hurt. It won’t affect our ability to act but it provides a guideline.
If someone is unsure whether they should do something that is related to GRAPE but doesn’t need funds or is related to GRAPE governance, they should make a proposal and get some feedback.

I like all points of this. We should consider this about the start of the voting process: I recommend to put out the proposal at any day of the week, then introduce the proposal during the weekly DAO call with a little discussion about it and open the vote for one week after the DAO call.

So the DAO should only vote for one proposal in each subcategory per week at maximum.

-1 new proposal/ discussion per week
-1 proposal in the voting process per week
This counts for each subDAO/ subcategory

I thought about it and I’d suggest keeping it out for the time being, until we get a feeling of how things work out without limiting us right from the start. If the proposals get too out of hand, we should definitely discuss limits and add them. My hope though is, that with subCategory Reps in place, this won’t happen since every subDAO then will have someone who keeps everything well organized. What do you think @Continental ?

Yeah. Focus should be on creating the subCategorys and ranks.

We will see how fast we grow and maybe add it to the DAO voting etc with a „mini-proposal“ if necessary.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.