Meeting ID: NIP-CN-20200602
Original version can be found at https://community.nebulas.io/d/754-6-1-pod.
Meeting time: Beijing time June 1, 2020 10:00am-12:00pm
Participants:
12 members participated, including Burton (KKL), Leec (NAX.one), Mark (NASAU), Lin Weimin (CVDIP237), Ravin (MRH2), Zoey (IBN), Linker, Huang Haozhi, Liao Junwei; Nebulas Foundation Members: Becky, Iris, Larry, etc.
Conference background:
The second PoD governance vote on the mainnet was launched on May 29. There are 44 nodes voting on 28 proposals/projects. Click here to view the pending proposal . This week, a new community-based technical committee was established and the list was announced. Here, many node operators have already had a complete governance experience. We have something to say about the current problems of PoD node governance and how it will develop in the future.
Meeting objectives:
Can sum up a proposal that can be immediately landed, standardize and upgrade the process of subsequent node governance.
Summary of the meeting:
A unanimous vote indicates that there is a need to change the current status of one-time centralized voting, changing the monthly voting to a weekly summary, or even daily updates.
Need to connect the different roles of node operators, technical committees, sponsors, Nebulas Foundation and other communities to make the token-governance-collaboration loop smoother while building an economy built on collaboration (in accordance with the characteristics of DAO). The greatest opportunity for enhancing the vitality of the community may lie in the ability to discover possibilities.
Conference overview:
Thanks to all the node operators who spoke! Due to the overwhelming content from this meeting, we have included just the highlights.
Promote node participation
Current problem: There are individual nodes that have never participated in node discussions and tend to abstain.
Suggestions for Improvement:
- Reward and punish: In addition to participating in voting, nodes should be compelled to participate in discussions. For example, by not participating in meetings will result in reduction of governance rewards.
- Enable trust: Verify all node participants via a KYC process.
Improve the effectiveness of node meetings
Current issue: PoD governance is organized shortly before and post voting. This needs to be more structured.
Suggestions for Improvement:
- Day of meeting: The meeting time should fixed and relative to the voting time. For example, on the day of each PoD governance vote, or a few days prior; there should also be time for governance nodes to review all proposals.
- Time: The fixed meeting time should be every Friday after 8pm. Participation of a node should be considered as a minimum of 50% ratio.
- Records: Every participant should read and review all proposals and consider items such as advantages, disadvantages, and difficulty.
- Personnel: Invite community members such as the proposal creator to participate in the meeting and discuss it with the node operators. This will allow the creator to introduce proposals in person.
Better understanding of the proposal
- Status: Members of the technical committee will leave explanations and suggestions under the proposal. At the same time, the members of the technical committee will recommend the budget, development time and other necessary information, and verify that the proposal is clearly written to make the proposal a good as possible.
- Quality: If the proposal is not well-written, it may not be included on the governance cycle. There is currently a situation where communication is not timely and the operation of the technical committee is not synchronized with the nodes in time. The Go.nebulas platform lacks features such as prioritizing.
Suggestions for Improvement:
- Information Disclosure: As a supporter, the technical committee provides sufficient support and advice. The technical committee is transparent and decentralized.
- Information Disclosure: Inviting sponsors to participate in the meeting, as stated above.
- Information Disclosure: There should be notifications services (forums, emails, node groups, etc.) when new proposals are added daily to avoid seeing many proposals resulting in the governance node being overwhelmed.
- Decision-making in advance: The official and top 6 nodes of the entire network should give some subjective suggestions before voting on each pending proposal.
- Schedule adjustment: The proposal deadline should be a week or two ahead of scheduled vote.
- Result: A better voting process.
Improved tools for the governance nodes:
Status: The Go.nebulas product is split via the mobile product and webpage based service. Although you can leave a message under the proposal, there is no compulsory reason for governance nodes to leave a message. Some proposers and community members cannot understand the votes cast by the node and there is no communication channel.
Suggestions for Improvement:
- Process improvement: It should be mandatory for governance nodes to leave a reason when voting.
- Process improvement: All voting behaviors of the nodes need to be tracked and recorded.
- Upgrade product: Wallets should enable one-click node construction and one-click voting. All node operations should be browsed and operated within the wallet.
- Proposal tags added by governance nodes: What the proposal is specifically for, what it means for voters (or investors), feasibility (can be completed), official suggestions, etc.
- Decentralization: Nodes listen to their supporters for voting. Based on the community result, the nodes vote on their behalf.
- Decentralization: The voting rights of foundation nodes are given up and delegated to community members.
- Supervision: The operation and supervision of nodes can be supervised by the majority of Nebulas holders (the number of real-name accounts is the assessment, not the amount of currency held to assess).
- Details: Voting needs to consider how money can be used more efficiently so that the voters can feel more at ease and the sponsors have greater income to support so that they have enough motivation to contribute.
- Follow-up: How to push the proposal forward
Post governance cycle:
Status: Just after completing a governance cycle, the technical committee should release the implementation status of this round of approved proposals.
For improvement suggestions, the following content of a proposal needs to be understood:
- How to supervise feedback and who is responsible?
- After the completion of the proposal, what positive impact will it have on the development of Nebulas?
- What does the Nebulas investor get in return(in the future)?
Attachment:
- Without additional rules, inflation expectations are actually a panel issue and 5% should be more than enough.
- The foundation can use NAX to support several functional departments, such as: KOL incubation team, “credit score” development team, and ecosystem contribution on-chain team. These teams as functional departments submit professional executable solutions, and the process of signing by the nodes will be very simple. If it is required to have the foundation sign contracts with these teams on the chain, it may not be necessary to support only one in the same direction, and it is easier for small teams to adapt.
- The NAX acquisition method is divided into two parts, one is “work” and one is “minimum security”. The “work” part is output through the functional department as mentioned above, and the “minimum security” part is output through the ID via the community active rules similar to credit points. If you go to Go.nebulas to submit a proposals or like a proposal, participate in node voting, and participate in dStaking, you will be eligible for a “minimum guarantee” of incentive.
- The proof of devotion is actually a more complex comprehensive system than the “credit score.” It should be a comprehensive index that links the externally exported KOL, “credit score,” and specific contribution content to the address. Certainly, to reach a certain threshold to obtain the right to governance is to participate in the node voting equivalent to one or half seats.
There are follow-up discussions in the message area. Including Hitters’ understanding of the node-technical committee-foundation relationship in Chinese: https://community.nebulas.io/d/752
