Permalink
Switch branches/tags
Nothing to show
Find file Copy path
63c754d Dec 12, 2018
3 contributors

Users who have contributed to this file

@john-light @Smokyish @luisivan
166 lines (114 sloc) 12.9 KB
AGP Title Author Status Track Created
1
The Aragon Governance Proposal Process
John Light (@john-light)
Approved
Meta
2018-10-12

AGP-1: The Aragon Governance Proposal Process

Version 1.0.6

What is an AGP?

AGP stands for Aragon Governance Proposal. An AGP is a document that details a change to the management, allocation, or use of shared resources owned or directly influenced by the Aragon Network. All AGPs must be consistent with the goals and values put forth in AGP-0 (the Aragon Manifesto) and compliant with the requirements outlined in this document, AGP-1. The AGP author is responsible for building consensus within the community for their AGP and documenting dissenting opinions.

AGP process rationale

The purpose of the Aragon Governance Proposal Process ("the AGP process") is to provide a structured process for making changes to the shared resources of the Aragon Network. For these shared resources, governance processes are needed to grant or deny access and approve or reject proposed changes. By creating a fair, lightweight, and transparent AGP process, the AGP-1 authors hope to give ANT holders a meaningful say in the governance of the Aragon Association and the Aragon Network and increase the chances of success for both.

Proposal workflow

Parties directly involved in the process are the AGP author (you), the AGP Editors, the Aragon Association (“the Association”), and Aragon Network voters.

Proposals follow this workflow:

  • Stage I: Select AGP Track
  • Stage II: Pre-proposal
  • Stage III: Work In Progress
  • Stage IV: Draft Proposal
  • Stage V: Final Proposal
  • Stage VI: Aragon Network Vote

During Stage III-IV AGP Editors will review proposals for formatting, legibility, and compliance with AGP-1, referring to AGP-1 as the basis for accepting, denying, or requesting modifications to a proposal. The role of AGP Editors is further described in the AGP Editors section.

At a high level, the AGP-1 workflow looks like this:

Stage I: Select AGP Track

Before you spend time working on a proposal, make sure the proposal complies with AGP-1 and has a chance of passing review by the AGP Editors and your peers. Review the AGP tracks and their requirements then select the track that you think is best for your proposal. If your proposal meets the requirements, it has a much greater chance of being accepted by AGP Editors and approved by Aragon Network voters.

There are four tracks that an AGP can be categorized into. Select the one you think is best for your AGP:

  • Association: proposals for making changes to the Association
  • Finance: proposals for transferring funds from the Association multisig
  • Meta: proposals for changing AGP-0 or AGP-1 (“changing the way things are changed”)
  • Proclamations: proposals for making a public statement on behalf of the Aragon Network

Proposals that cannot be categorized into one of these tracks will likely be denied by AGP Editors. At the discretion of AGP Editors, a proposal may be categorized as “Other” until a new track is approved as part of a Meta AGP.

In addition to the requirement that all AGPs must be consistent with AGP-0, each track has its own requirements for AGPs as follows:

Association
Proposals made to the Association track must affect one or more of the following:

  • Association-owned assets, excluding funds held in the Association multisig
    • E.g. “Should the Aragon trademark be dedicated to the public domain?”
  • Association policies
    • E.g. “Should the Aragon Code of Conduct be updated to include a community-wide ban on Carlos Matos memes?”

Finance
Proposals made to the Finance track must affect the movement of assets held by the Association multisig. The Association will have discretion over which multisig transfers must go through the AGP process.

  • All code and content funded through the AGP process must be released under one of the following licenses:
    • Creative Commons (CC0, CC-BY, CC-SA, CC-BY-SA)
    • GPL
    • AGPL
    • MIT

Meta
Proposals made to the Meta track must affect changes to AGP-0 or AGP-1. The Association has the power to add and remove AGP Editors and fix errata in AGP-0 or AGP-1 on an as-needed basis without going through the AGP process. All other proposals to modify AGP-0 or AGP-1 should be made to the Meta track.

  • E.g. “Should the min. acceptance quorum of Aragon Network votes be increased?”

Proclamations
Proposals made to the Proclamations track must be consistent with the Aragon Manifesto.

  • E.g. “The Aragon Network declares February 10th to be Aragon Day.”

Stage II: Pre-proposal

During Stage II you should seek feedback on your AGP idea by sharing it with your peers in the Aragon community and soliciting their feedback. Examples of appropriate venues to share your AGP idea include:

Be open-minded and respectful of all feedback you receive. Adjust your proposal to address serious concerns as they come up to increase the odds of your proposal passing review in later stages.

Stage III: Work In Progress

After you have asked the Aragon community whether an idea has any chance of support and have received sufficient feedback to feel confident going forward, you can create a draft AGP as a pull request to the AGP repo. Use a template from the Template section below to ensure you are including all the necessary information.

  • If agreeable, an AGP Editor will assign the AGP a number (generally the PR number related to the AGP), move the proposal from Stage III to Stage IV by updating the status in the AGP, and merge your pull request. The AGP Editor will not unreasonably deny an AGP Stage IV status.
  • Reasons for denying Stage IV status include being too unfocused, too broad, duplication of effort, being technically unsound, not providing proper motivation or addressing concerns by reviewers, or not in compliance with AGP-1.

Templates
Below is a list of AGP templates for each track. Copy the template for the track your AGP is in, fill it out, and submit the pull request with your AGP for review. Sections marked as “required” in the template must be completed. Note that all proposals must be licensed CC-0.

Stage IV: Draft Proposal

Once the first draft has been merged into the AGP repo, you may submit follow-up pull requests with further changes to your draft until such point as you believe the AGP to be mature and ready to proceed to Stage V. After a proposal in Stage IV has been thoroughly reviewed, you may request that an AGP Editor moves the proposal from Stage IV to Stage V.

  • If agreeable, the AGP Editor will move the proposal from Stage IV to Stage V by updating the status in the AGP.
  • A request to move the proposal from Stage IV to Stage V will be denied if material changes are still expected to be made to the draft. No changes can be made to an AGP while it is in Stage V or VI.

Stage V: Final Proposal

An AGP in Stage V is the final version that will appear on the ballot during the next Aragon Network vote cycle. AGPs that move from Stage IV to Stage V are reviewed by the Aragon Association Board of Directors and, if approved during the pre-vote review session, are added to the list of AGPs that will be submitted to the Aragon Network for a vote. Approval or rejection of an AGP during Stage V is made at the discretion of the Association board.

The Association board review session begins two weeks before the next Aragon vote cycle is scheduled to begin and ends one week before the next vote cycle is scheduled to begin.

Stage VI: Aragon Network Vote

All AGPs that have moved to Stage V since the last Aragon Network vote cycle and have been approved by the Association board are included on the ballot in the current vote cycle. During the vote cycle, Aragon Network voters will review proposals on the ballot and cast their votes.

If a vote on an AGP produces a Rejected result, then the AGP must revert to Stage IV or be withdrawn by the author. If a vote on an AGP produces an Approved result, then the AGP will either be executed automatically by the Aragon Network or else dutifully executed by a manager designated in the AGP (or designated by the Association board if no manager is designated in the AGP).

The result of the Aragon Network vote will be recorded in the corresponding AGP file by an agent of the Aragon Association.

Aragon Network Vote Cycles

Aragon Network vote cycles take place quarterly on the following days, starting at 00:00 UTC time and lasting for 48 hours:

  • Third Thursday of January
  • Third Thursday of April
  • Third Thursday of July
  • Third Thursday of October

During each vote cycle a Meta proposal will be voted on to maintain the current frequency of vote cycles. If ANT holders vote “No” then that will indicate that a Meta proposal to adjust the frequency may be needed during the next vote cycle.

Support required
With the exception of Meta track proposals, the minimum support required for approval is >50% of all votes cast, an “absolute majority”. The minimum acceptance quorum required for approval is >0% (at least one positive vote needs to be cast). Votes are token-weighted, so 10^-18 ANT (the smallest possible fraction of one ANT) equals one vote, and at least 10^-18 ANT is required to vote.

For Meta track proposals, the minimum support required for approval is >66.6666666666666666% of all votes cast, a “supermajority”. The minimum acceptance quorum required for approval is >0% (at least one positive vote needs to be cast). Votes are token-weighted, so 10^-18 ANT (the smallest possible fraction of one ANT) equals one vote, and at least 10^-18 ANT is required to vote.

Emergency Vote
The Association can call an emergency Aragon Network vote at any time with minimum 48 hours notice by a unanimous approval vote of the Association board. In case of emergency, immediately following approval by the board, the Association will make a best effort to notify ANT holders of the vote using these communication channels:

AGP Editors

AGP Editors are experienced and active members of the Aragon community selected by the Association to manage the AGP workflow. AGP Editors are not gatekeepers to the proposal system. AGP Editors exist to make proposals submitted to the AGP repo easier to review.

AGP Editors have two responsibilities:

  • Review proposals
  • Move proposals from Stage III through to Stage V

Review proposals
AGP Editors review proposals and accept, deny, or request modifications to them based on formatting, legibility, and compliance with AGP-1.

Move proposals from Stage III through to Stage V
After a proposal author submits a pull request with their proposal in Stage III, an AGP Editor will review the proposal to make sure it is compliant with AGP-1. If so, the AGP Editor will move the AGP to Stage IV by merging the author’s pull request in the AGP repo and assigning the proposal an AGP number. After a proposal in Stage IV has been thoroughly reviewed, the author can request that an AGP Editor moves the proposal from Stage IV to Stage V.

The current AGP Editors are:

History

This document borrows from Ethereum’s EIP-1 written by Martin Becze and Hudson Jameson, which itself was derived from Bitcoin's BIP-0001 written by Amir Taaki, which in turn was derived from Python's PEP-0001. In many places text was simply copied and modified. Although the PEP-0001 text was written by Barry Warsaw, Jeremy Hylton, and David Goodger, they are not responsible for its use in the Aragon Governance Process, and should not be bothered with governance questions specific to Aragon or the AGP process. Please direct all comments and questions to the AGP Editors.

License

Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.