Article IV - DAO Institutions, Other Rules and Guidelines

Breed Proposal Ideas
1

Article IV - DAO Institutions, Other Rules and Guidelines

Section 1. Participation. A person becomes eligible to participate in the DAO by possessing at least one (1) sBREED token. This requirement shall not apply to members of the Core Team.

Section 2. Proposal Jury. 1. A Proposal Jury is hereby established which shall be responsible for the screening and vetting of proposals submitted by the community to the Governance Proposal System.

  1. Composition. The Proposal Jury shall be composed of five (5) jury members which, for its first iteration, shall be appointed by the Core Team within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of the DAOstitution. In the subsequent iterations, the composition shall be as follows: two (2) of the jury members shall be appointed by the Core Team while the remaining three (3) jury members shall be voted upon and elected by the community within thirty (30) days from the end of the term of the first and subsequent iterations of the Proposal Jury. Candidates receiving the highest number of votes vis-a-vis the vacant jury slots shall be deemed elected by the community. The Core Team shall likewise make its appointment within the said thirty-day period. Should the community fail to vote members into the Proposal Jury within the thirty-day period, the Core Team shall make the necessary appointments as regards the remaining jury slot(s).
  2. Qualification. A member must be a holder of at least five thousand (5,000) sBREED tokens in order to be eligible to participate in the Proposal Jury Elections as a candidate. To become a candidate, a member shall either nominate himself/herself in the DAO Forums, or be nominated and accept such nomination. A candidate shall be admitted as a jury member if he/she garners votes that would place him/her within the top three (3) of all the participating candidates, or on such top spot depending on the available number of vacancies. A jury member must be a holder of sBREED throughout the entire duration of his/her term. The qualification requirements on staking BREED and possessing sBREED shall not apply to a member appointed by the Core Team to the Proposal Jury.
  3. Term. A jury member shall have a term of six (6) months. No jury member shall be elected or appointed to the Proposal Jury for more than three (3) consecutive terms.
  4. Vacancies. Any vacancy in the Proposal Jury which occurs before the expiration of the six-month term, shall be filled within thirty (30) days from the occurrence of such vacancy. If the vacancy arises from a slot reserved for the community, then the vacancy shall be filled through a vote by the community. Otherwise, the vacancy shall be filled through appointment by the Core Team. The jury member voted or appointed to fill in a vacancy shall only serve for the remainder of the term of the member being replaced, as applicable.
  5. Rules of Procedure. The Proposal Jury may propose its own Rules of Procedures which shall include provisions on its operations and processes in the discharge of its function.

Section 3. DAO Court. A DAO Court shall hereby be established as the dispute resolution body and judicial organ of the DAO who shall, among others, be responsible for moderating the forums and deciding inter-DAO controversies, issues and cases.

  1. Composition. The DAO Court shall be initially composed of five (5) court members who, for its first iteration, shall be appointed by the Core Team within thirty (30) days from the effectivity of the DAOstitution. In the subsequent iterations, the composition shall be as follows: three (3) of the court members shall be appointed by the Core Team while the remaining two (2) court members shall be voted upon and elected by the community within thirty (30) days from the end of the term of the first and subsequent iterations of the DAO Court. Candidates receiving the highest number of votes vis-a-vis the vacant court seats shall be deemed elected by the community. The Core Team shall likewise make its appointment within the said thirty-day period. Should the community fail to vote members into the DAO Court within the thirty-day period, the Core Team shall make the necessary appointments as regards the remaining court seat(s). Any changes or modifications in the number of court members, length of their term, and their Rules of Procedure shall be submitted through a proposal from the community.
  2. Qualification. A member must be a holder of at least five thousand (5,000) sBREED tokens in order to be eligible to participate in the DAO Court Elections as a candidate. To become a candidate, a member shall either nominate himself/herself in the DAO Forums, or be nominated and accept such nomination. A candidate shall be admitted as a court member if he/she garners votes that would place him/her within the top three (3) of all the participating candidates, or on such top spot depending on the available number of vacancies. A court member must be a holder of sBREED throughout the entire duration of his/her term. The qualification requirements on staking BREED and possessing sBREED shall not apply to a member appointed by the Core Team to the DAO Court.
  3. Disciplinary Powers. The DAO Court, in the discharge of its functions, shall have, among others, the power to enforce its decisions by issuing warnings, authorizing the temporary or permanent ban of members or accounts in the forum, causing the removal of jury members or fellow court members for violations of the DAOstitution, and instituting such other disciplinary or regulatory measures as may be reasonable under the circumstances.
  4. Dispute Resolution. All DAO-related disputes, issues, cases and controversies shall be submitted to the DAO Court for resolution and the DAO Court shall have the judicial power to adjudicate the same. Members hereby agree to waive any recourse to arbitration or courts of law with respect to such DAO-related disputes, issues, cases and controversies. The DAO Court, however, shall have the discretion to waive its exclusive jurisdiction if it determines it to be in the best interest of the DAO.
  5. Term. A court member shall have a term of six (6) months. No court member shall be elected to the DAO Court for more than three (3) consecutive terms.
  6. Vacancies. Any vacancy in the DAO Court which occurs before the expiration of the six-month term, shall be filled within thirty (30) days from the occurrence of such vacancy. If the vacancy arises from a slot reserved for the community, then the vacancy shall be filled through a vote by the community. Otherwise, the vacancy shall be filled through appointment by the Core Team. The court member voted or appointed to fill in a vacancy shall only serve for the remainder of the term of the member being replaced, as applicable.
  7. Rules of Procedure. The DAO Court, when acting as a collective body, shall only do so through a majority vote. However, it may decide on such other alternative voting requirement or mode of action for non-collective actions by proposing its own Rules of Procedures which shall include provisions on its standards and processes on deciding cases, issues and controversies submitted to it for decision.
  8. Publication of decisions. All rulings and decisions of the DAO Court shall be provided in written form and published in the appropriate places that will ensure its visibility such as, but not limited to, a dedicated section in the DAO Forums.
11 Likes
2

I think there should be some sort of designation when/if a member got selected. Let’s say “DAO Member” for the participants. “DAO Juror” for the proposal jury and “DAO Judge” for DAO Court.

8 Likes
3

That’s agreeable! So it’s easy for us to recognize who’s in the position. Anyways, that would take place when there are elected jury and court members. :+1:

5 Likes
4

for me, the minimum amount of sBREED holdings should be increased for you to be qualified as DAO court member. it should be amended to minimum 10,000 sBREED.

3 Likes
5

well, I think you should not be just a holder, because everyone can have at least 5,000 sBREED and nominate themselves as a Jury or Court member. nominees should possess some sort of qualifications pertaining to knowledge and character. the adjudicating body should also consider that. :ok_hand:

5 Likes
6

Have to agree with this one. Those who are already very familiar with the project as well as reliable can be nominated. But I also suggest having some kind of “knowledge test” to know the level of knowledge they posses.

5 Likes
7

Familiarity with the project will come naturally when it comes to popularity level.

The more familiar you are with the project, the more popular you are in the community. And I believe that converts to what you are saying the “knowledge test”.

That then will get you nominated. Rest of the work will come from the core team. :+1:

2 Likes
8

You’ll indeed be more popular the more knowledge you have with the project because members will be seeking your help in terms of understanding the project.

But then again, you’ll also be popular by just frequently engaging with the community itself. So, I think the “knowledge test” being referred there is a qualification for you to be nominated.

2 Likes
9

Couldn’t agree more with this one. I must say we should push through this "knowledge test’ to filter the most qualified for the position.

By then, we could decide who is even worthy to nominate. After all, we want what’s the best for the team and the community. What do you think about this guys?

3 Likes
10

Ok, I got your point, buddy. What I’m trying to say is, you can be nominated by being popular. But you’re right, knowledge can make you popular but popularity doesn’t always mean you’re knowledgeable.

In the end, “knowledge test” is still necessary. :+1:

2 Likes
11

Exactly! I believe the team will come up with such solutions. I’m looking forward to its outcome. :+1:

3 Likes
12

This is definitely a notable point. Having designations or labels would definitely help in recognizing those who are in position. Would you suggest this be applicable only on the Discourse platform or other channels as well (i.e. Discord)?

1 Like
13

Interesting point. As much as possible we want as many of our community members to take part in the decision making process/ DAO governance which is why the minimum amount of sBREED holdings is at least 5,000 but would like to hear why you think the holdings should be increased more.

14

Intriguing suggestion on “nominees should possess some sort of qualifications pertaining to knowledge and character” but would like to hear more on these qualifications that can aid in filtering the nominees better.

What are more concrete qualifications you think we can consider?

1 Like
15

Well, I do have one. Aside from project knowledge, nominee should possess high level of enthusiasm! Just like the one you guys looking for when you launched your builder ambassador program. :grin:

Btw, do your existing builders have a high chance to get the position?

2 Likes
16

For uniformity, it is best to have the same format both here and on Discord. Or if it’s possible you can take the format from Discord server. The roles/designations there are well organized.

2 Likes
17

This is actually a good suggestion. The team should take this into consideration and choose the right people with warm energy, to keep the community and the project eager and enjoyable for all.

But overall, these nominees should still be chosen wisely.

1 Like
18

Good thinking! Aside from being knowledgeable about the project, the Proposal Jury and the DAO Court should be able to encourage all members to participate, contribute their ideas, and vote. This could also help further expand the community (for the better!).

19

Yes! We all want to be part of this great project! And having said that, we also want to have members that will step up and will guide/lead this community in a well-mannered way. :+1:

20

Good point! Although, it might be good to consider to design a “knowledge test” that still feels inclusive but not daunting enough to discourage members from wanting to get nominated. :grin:

1 Like