BDIP-2: Article II - Process of Creation / Composition and Qualification of Proposals

Article II - Process of Creation / Composition and Qualification of Proposals

Section 1. Proposal Formation. The ideation, creation and drafting of the initial proposal shall be the first stage of the proposal process before it is deemed submitted for pre-qualification.

Section 2. Submission for Pre-Qualification (Official Thread) - A proposal shall be deemed submitted as an Initial Proposal if a thread is created in the DAO Forums by a proponent indicating it to be as the official proposal thread.

The proposal thread shall, at a minimum, have the following information and content:

  • Name or names of the proponent-members;
  • Sufficient description of the suggested course of action or inaction;
  • Proposed budget for proposals that require the use of funds from the treasury;
  • Timeline of the implementation of the project
  • Be clear and all moments that can be misunderstood should be spelled out in detail
  • Such other relevant and pertinent information that will aid the decision of the community as to such a proposal.

Section 3. Pre-Qualification (First Evaluation) - Among others, it should be clear in the Initial Proposal what the community would be voting for consistent with the requirement on what the proposal thread should contain. More significantly, the Proposal Jury should determine (1) whether the initial proposal violates any other provision, rule or guideline of the DAOstitution and (2) whether there has been enough discussion on the proposal to meet the discussion requirement. A majority vote must be reached as to these two main conditions for pre-qualification unless otherwise.

Section 4. Deliberation Process - The Proposal Jury may discuss the proposals directly and publicly in the DAO forums together with other members of the community. However, they shall also have independent working sessions when they have to consider several proposals and discuss them fully before rendering a decision. All of the Proposal Jury should research regarding the proposals in terms of potential violations and discuss their thoughts for the final decision. Final decision should be agreed upon on the internal working group communications and approved by each member of DAO Proposal Jury’s team.

  1. Approval - if the proposal is approved it may now be passed further in the proposal process for finalization.
  2. Rejection - if the proposal is rejected, the following rules shall govern depending on the reason for the rejection:
  3. i. DAOstitution Violation. 1. A proposal rejected for being violative of the DAOstitution shall expressly identify, explain and state the provision or section of the DAOstitution alleged to be violated. This justification should be set forth in a post in the same thread where the proposal is being discussed for prequalification or a separate dedicated thread, if the situation so warrants by reason of the importance or magnitude of the rejected proposal.

    ii. Insufficient Discussion - An Initial Proposal may be rejected if the Jury believes that it was not sufficiently discussed by the community. If, upon evaluation, the proposal is deemed by the Proposal Jury to have failed to meet the discussion requirement, the discussion period for the proposal shall be extended by fourteen (14) days (“extension period”). Thereafter, it will go through the following process:

    1. Approval - if, upon the lapse of the extension period, the proposal is deemed to have satisfied the discussion requirement, it may now be passed on for finalization three (3) days after the end of the extension period.

    2. Rejection - If, however, after the lapse of the extension period, the proposal is still deemed to have failed to garner sufficient discussion as to satisfy the discussion requirement, the Proposal Jury may vote to reject the said proposal within three (3) days after the end of the extension period.

    3. Reproposal - A proposal rejected in this manner may be re-proposed after the lapse of one (1) month and the proponent shall be required to link to the official thread of the rejected initial proposal. Upon reproposal, the Jury shall only consider whether the said proposal has now garnered sufficient discussion as to have satisfied the discussion requirement.

Section 5. Final Proposal - The initial proposal will be finalized and shall be entered into the Snapshot platform after undergoing final review of the Proposal Jury which shall cover non-substantive or technical matters such as, but not limited to: formatting, file type, or other technical issues.

  1. Finalization - Once pre-qualified, the proposal will be submitted to a community vote on the Snapshot platform through a referendum which shall run for a period of seven (7) days. From pre-qualification to the submission of the proposal to a vote on the Snapshot platform, the proponents should be in communication with the Proposal Jury for any non-substantive updates to the proposal or any potential action or advice from the DAO Court.
  2. Submission for Referendum - After the proposal is finalized it can be passed further for the referendum. Provided that, the number of proposals under consideration do not exceed the maximum allowed by the Rule on Simultaneous Proposals.

Section 6. Publication - The publication of the decisions of the Proposal Jury shall be made one (1) day after the referendum ends in the dedicated DAO Forum Proposal section.

Section 7. Execution - Unless otherwise provided by the proposal itself, the execution of proposals should begin a day after it is passed by referendum.

  1. For proposals that have execution provisions - Time frame and details for execution will be coordinated with the appropriate personnel and working groups.
  2. For proposals that have no execution provisions - Details and plans for execution shall be formulated by the proponent within a one (1) working day period, right after the completion of the referendum.

All related discussion threads and venues will reflect whether or not it is “Approved,” “Awaiting Execution” or “Executed”.

1 Like

In section 2 of this article, is it relevant to say that alongside the proponent’s identification, the public wallet address should also be included? Or does it compromise the members’ security?

It could be, but maybe they can think of someway that will not compromise member’s security.


For me, reproposal part should be more specific when it comes in details. Like, declined submissions should be revised aligning itself to current conditions. :+1:


I agree, this can narrow down everything. Provide more insight while aligned on the conditions.

1 Like

I think this is something that can be worked on. I’m with you in this pal. Great suggestion actually


Step by step process makes everything better so that people will know what to do and how they will do it making everything smooth.

That’s right and it’ll help with reaching a certain goal and making sure everything is aligned. One thing apart from this is that the team should always be ready with a back up plan in case we experience some inevitable mishaps along the way


Good point there! Some proposals become relevant at a later part of the DAO. It’s better to keep it when rejected. Who know, someday your proposal might be the most important contribution to the DAO history! :raised_hands:

1 Like

Finally! An update for the proposals. This is definitely helpful for everyone to easily identify what proposals qualify.

1 Like

I agree they can still implement something that can work out members security.

1 Like

Yas! It’s really great! I’m also really pleased to see updates! :star_struck:

Thanks! The team is really doing a great job setting up this DAO! Pretty sure that future conflicts could be settled easily because of this initiatives. :+1:


Definitely it will guide everyone step by step for better understanding.

1 Like

They really know what they’re doing. I’m all in for BreederDAO! One step at a time. LFG!! :fire:


I agree, they always need to be ready and have alternatives.

We all are, and looking forward for more.

I’m sure they will come up of something for that.

Same! Really expecting for more moving forward.

I’m confident that they do! I am so impressed at how in a short period of time we see immense growth in the project. Kudos team!