To make our process both streamlined and more nimble this proposal seeks to do several things:
First:
Immediately cut the voting threshold from 50 to 25 to pass proposals via the forum.
Second: give the tiny team the go-ahead to look into moving towards an “Expert Gov-style” system to replace the forum vote entirely. As this would take more time and resources and may not be entirely feasible right now, this is not to say it should be implemented immediately, but as resources allow. The idea being to make our system more responsive and start growing a smaller but hopefully more “dedicated” group of govs to hash out plans and move them forward and be able to do so quickly.
That is not to say moving on ideas without thought, care, and debate, but to make the system be less like hunting around trying to get an arbitrary number of votes (for example a majority of at least 50 votes on the forums, compared to the 3,712 govs with tiny locked) and more like a group of users who want to move from having a passive stake to an active stake in their role as govs and helping Tinyman grow.
It would function similarly to Algorand’s xGov system: You would be able to lock tiny for xtiny in a vault lock much like our current Tinyman Governance system. Xtiny would represent your voting power to vote up or down on proposals on-chain to push them forwards to a full-body vote.
Xtiny would function much like a LST, you could use it to vote in proposals, put it into an LP paired with Tiny to effectively give you an ability to farm tiny in an LP similar to say algo/talgo currently works. If a proposal comes up for a vote
Xgovs would receive no compensation for holding xtiny unless paired with another token in an LP, and governance votes to give it a farm for the pairing (say a tiny/xtiny and farming it), giving Tinyman a stable-token setup option akin to say algo/talgo or xalgo/talgo without the staking rewards.
Should this proposal be passed and when it is implemented, the team should also highlight tiny/xtiny in our monthly governance farming voting system to alert current and future govs that it is both an option, and one that should be desirable for users of our platform.
A third option, again looking to Algorand’s xGov system, would be to allow a rotation council of members (voted on by a full Tiny Gov vote) to any govs that wanted to join it, and have those members hold the voting power to pass proposals with an up or down vote in conjunction with the Tinyman team. This council would have terms, could be kicked out by a vote from the council or tiny govs in the event of bad behavior/otherwise dangerous actions to the protocol and community. This group could start small and expand overtime as needed as detail and a pilot program is worked out. Again this would be a non-compensated position.
- Cut the minimum voting to move forward to 25 votes
- Do not cut the minimum voting threshold to move forward to 25 votes
- Work On Replacing Forum Vote With an Expert Gov System
- Do Not Work On Replacing Forum Vote With an Expert Gov System
- Replace Forum Vote with a “Council System”
- Do Not Replace Forum vote with a “Council System”
