Sirius 1.6 Governance vs Next Upgrades Governance

The next Sirius rc/v1.6 update will introduce significant changes to the governance system of MultiversX, setting a new precedent for community participation and decision-making. This post will focus on detailing and comparing the Sirius governance parameters with those planned for future releases. Understanding these differences is important for anyone involved in our community, as they directly impact how decisions will be made and how every stakeholder can contribute.

Sirius Release rc/v1.6: Bringing Governance The Sirius rc/v1.6 isn’t just another upgrade; it’s a transformation. Central to this change is the deployment of a new governance system contract. But until being able to use it for governance calls here’s what the Sirius Governance Vote will look like:

  • Minimum Staked: an average of 1 EGLD for the snapshot period, excluding of sEGLD and hsEGLD.
  • Proposal Cost: Maintained at a modest 1 EGLD.
  • Snapshot and Voting Period: Both set at a standard 10 days.
  • Quorum: A reasonable 10% of the participating voting power.
  • Pass and Veto Thresholds: Balanced at 50% and 33.40% respectively.

These parameters are crafted to encourage active participation, but as we progress, and as more members of our ecosystem become comfortable and keen on participating, we plan to elevate the quorum to a more robust 33% starting with Vega Release - rc/v1.7.0. This gradual increase is aimed at scaling our governance model in tandem with the growing engagement and maturity of our community.

The Road Ahead: Governance in Next Releases Looking forward, the governance landscape is set to evolve. The future releases propose changes that are both subtle and substantial:

  • Minimum Staked: Will still be 1 EGLD on average but we will also open the possibility to include sEGLD and hsEGLD, broadening the scope.
  • Proposal Cost: It will see an increase to 1000 EGLD.
  • Quorum: It will shift significantly to 33%, raising the bar for consensus-building.
  • Pass and Veto Thresholds: Remains consistent with the Sirius release, ensuring continuity.

Comparative Insights: What Changes and Why It Matters The shift from Sirius to future releases isn’t just numerical; it’s somehow strategic.

  • The inclusion of sEGLD and hsEGLD in the staking requirement democratizes the governance process, inviting wider community involvement.
  • One of the most significant changes in the governance parameters for future releases is the substantial increase in the proposal cost to 1000 EGLD. This adjustment is not just about raising the stakes; it’s a strategic move to ensure that proposed initiatives are thoroughly considered and well-supported. By elevating the proposal cost, we aim to foster a scenario where only those initiatives that are truly beneficial and have substantial backing are put forward. It’s a way to encourage proposers to deeply engage with the community, gain support, and promote their proposals effectively, reducing the likelihood of frivolous or poorly conceived ideas being presented. This change is hoped to lead to a more efficient and impactful decision-making process, where the risk of losing a significant amount of funds serves as a deterrent against unvetted or unsupported proposals.
  • The raised quorum threshold reflects a push towards greater consensus, ensuring that decisions are backed by a more significant portion of the community.

Reflecting on the Implications These changes signal a shift towards a more involved and perhaps more cautious governance approach. It’s a balancing act between broadening participation and ensuring that proposals are thoroughly vetted and backed by substantial community support. As stakeholders of MultiversX Ecosystem, it’s crucial to understand and adapt to these changes, recognizing that governance is not static but a continually evolving dialogue.

Conclusion: The evolution from Sirius rc/v1.6 to subsequent releases in our governance parameters is a journey towards refining our decision-making ecosystem. It’s essential for us, as a community, to stay informed, engaged, and proactive in these changes. Governance in blockchain is a shared responsibility, and our collective involvement shapes the future of MultiversX.

4 Likes

This sounds very reasonable to me. The community will be able to actually test the governance, considering the low amount needed for a proposal (maybe too low ?), and we actually get to see what kind of involvement we get from the community when voting is needed. Maybe this will help us shape the changes that are applied starting with Vega.

Thanks!

For the subsequent releases, will we get the possibility to vote (yes/no) for each feature individually or will it continue to be restricted to a vote for the “whole thing” (i.e. the entire update)?

Hey @prettyflacko

Nice to see you contributing to Agora. Welcome!

Answering your question: starting next releases we will have 1 maximum 2 features prepared per release, therefore you will be voting for something more specific. Does this solve your concern?

For example, Vega will bring only Staking v4.

2 Likes

Thank you @schimih ! Great, that answers my question :slight_smile:

This guideline of gradual ramp-up of governance leaves room for gradual learning, openness to a large number of experimenting participants and the possibility of adjusting conditions as maturity progresses. To be continued ! good job team! :heart:

3 Likes