🏛️Governance

Badger Improvement Proposals

At its core, Badger is run by its community members. As such, major changes to BadgerDAO go through a full-community approval process known as Badger Improvement Proposals (BIP). Some actions that have required BIPs include: adjusting fees for Vault products, committing treasury funds to support grant programs, and making major purchases such as the badger.com domain name. More details on the BIP process can be found here, but at its core requires:

1. Discussion. Ideas for BIPs usually begin on the Badger Discord, forum, or elsewhere in the community.

2. Forum Feedback. A community member opens a Request for Feedback (RFF) in the Badger Discord to start initial community discussion. Following discussion, a more extensive draft BIP is circulated on the Badger forum for a period of debate and refinement lasting at least five days. Any member of the Badger community may propose a BIP.

3. Forum Vote. A vote is held on the forum, requiring a quorum of at least 50 votes.

4. Snapshot Vote. After reaching quorum on the forum, a member of the core Badger team will post the BIP to Snapshot.org vote where BADGER token holders can vote. This vote usually lasts three days, however this period can be shortened to 24 hours in urgent cases. Proposed BIPs require a simple majority (50% +1) to pass.

5. Implementation. Following a successful Snapshot vote, signers of Badger’s multisig are authorized to deploy code, make payments, or otherwise begin work to implement the BIP.

Council of Badgers

In February 2021, a Council of seven members, three from the core team and four from the community, was formed by BIP 28 to handle grant requests. The initial members of the Council were chosen by a forum nomination process and a community Snapshot vote.

Over time the Council suffered various changes, members were changed and more responsibilities were put into place so it could serve the true purpose of its creation; to have a group of members , chosen by the community, that had a notorious influence over how decisions were made. BIP 93, outlined as "Council 2.0" created the framework for Council operations and their role in ensuring an engaged community that is active and empowered in DAO governance.

This frameworks consists of:

Part I: Governance (BIP) Process

The governance process facilitates community, Core team and Council involvement in bringing new proposals forward. The Council has primary responsibility for facilitating Badger governance and will act for the good of the community regardless of personal opinions or financial interests.

This section provides the framework for:

1. BIP Creation

2. Forum Signaling

3. Snapshot Voting

4. Implementation

BIP Creation

Each BIP should balance the needs of all Badger stakeholders while safeguarding growth and viability of the DAO.

The Council will engage with members in the Badger Forum and Discord who would like to bring proposals to governance. Initial drafts should be created by the sponsoring member(s) of the community and then refined in collaboration with the Council. The Council will ensure BIPs:

• Are properly formatted and easily understood

• Include all relevant information for voters to make informed decisions

• Have considered impacts to the Core team, treasury, tokenomics, etc.

• Outline how BIPs address / impact prior BIPs

• Are capable of being implemented technically and financially

• Are safe from attack vectors and legal risk

• Have clear implementation plans that have been vetted by the people who need to do the work

• Have an BIP/RFF channel in the public Discord for community engagement

Forum Signaling

The Badger Forum provides the most community exposure to a proposal. For this reason, BIPs will be posted on the Forum to give the community the chance to provide feedback to the Council before a BIP is sent to a snapshot vote.

The Council posts BIPs to the Forum after it is approved in draft form by a majority of Council members. The Core team may post a BIP to remove the Council or alter its membership, but otherwise should work through the council.

BIP voting in the forum is a way for the community to signal support and objections in a quantifiable way. Forum voting is one of many inputs to the feedback loop and is non-binding. BIP signal voting and commenting will be held on the Forum for 72 hours. The Council can vote for a shorter signaling period.

Based on community feedback and level of engagement, the council may opt for 4 possible outcomes:

1. Proceed: BIP will be taken to snapshot

2. Rework: BIP will be updated based on feedback and submitted to the forum feedback again

3. Extend: The signaling period may be extended by the council to allow discussions to settle or to allow for additional community exposure

4. Halt: a. Work on the BIP will be stopped until/unless circumstances warrant it being revisited b. The council will provide a written explanation in the Forum comments

The Core team may choose to formally endorse or object to a BIP based on their collective view of the benefits or risks to the DAO. In this case:

• A formal written team statement for or against a BIP can be ratified via a Core Team 2/3 majority emoji vote

• This statement will be published on the forum and linked in the snapshot vote

Individual members of the Core team remain free to express their personal preferences regardless of the Core Team formal statement.

Snapshot Voting

BIPs will be moved to a snapshot vote based on a majority of the Council voting in favor via an emoji vote.

A snapshot vote outcome requires a minimum 100k votes and will remain open for a minimum of 72 hours. A snapshot will be closed and not passed if 72 hours have elapsed and it has not reached the 100k vote quorum.

If a snapshot does not reach quorum then the Council will evaluate the reason for the lack of community engagement and will decide on next steps. For example, the Council may work with the community to address the reason it did not get enough support and then resubmit it through the governance process which may, or may not, include another pass through the Forum. Or, the Council could choose to let the outcome stand with no further action.

Implementation:

• The Core team will schedule implementation of the BIP after snapshot passage

• Core Team will include a member of the Council to the pod owner’s meeting to discuss upcoming / approved BIPs

• Implementation timeframe, or a plan to create one, will be communicated to the community after the next Core team meeting following the snapshot passage

• During implementation it may become clear that the BIP cannot be reasonably implemented because of financial constraints, technical impossibility, legal risk, or some other existential risk to the DAO.

• If the Core team decides a BIP cannot proceed then:

  a. The team is permitted to stop work on the BIP until the issue is resolved

  b. This issue may be resolved through a new BIP that amends or cancels the original

  c. Responsibility for the updated BIP is a shared responsibility between the Core team and the Council.

Part II. Check and Balances

The Council is being entrusted with new governance responsibilities. It is important for the community and Core Team to have the ability to check those new responsibilities. This section outlines these checks and balances.

Core Team Oversight

• The Core Team will appoint an Oversight Board of their choosing to review Council performance and recommend improvements.

• The Oversight Board will review council performance and compensation quarterly.

• At any point, the Core Team may directly post a snapshot to remove the Council. This will:

  a. Transfer responsibility to the Core team for moving BIPs to > snapshot via a simple majority of all full time team members.

  b. Remove any and all Council decision making authority.

  c. All subsequent governance decisions will require a snapshot vote.

Community Oversight

• The community may force a snapshot to remove the Council:

  a. Via an emoji vote on the Badger Community Discord with least 50 affirmative votes and a majority in favor

  b. The snapshot vote will last for 96 hours. During this time governance will be paused unless it is deemed to be critical for operational or security by at least 70% of the Core Team.

  c. Votes to remove the Council are limited to one every 8 weeks.

Part III: Council Structure & Responsibilities

This governance proposal assigns responsibilities to the Council with the goal of improving and streamlining governance, increasing community involvement and allowing the Core team to focus on strategy, operations, partnerships and growth.

Additional Responsibilities of all Councilors: Below are Councilor responsibilities not defined in the sections above:

• Be present on a majority of AMA’s and community facing calls made to discuss governance in process.

• Participate in monthly council meetings to keep in sync and discuss governance process and improvements.

• Attend up to 20 hours per quarter of extraordinary meetings about the governance process.

• Always vote in the best interests of the DAO and the community over their own personal interests.

• Never accept personal bribes or other favors for votes.

• Any exchange or value for outcomes (eg. Badger votes for gauges, protocol emissions to a vault) will always be directed towards the DAO/Treasury and fully disclosed as part of the governance matter in question.

Council Roles: The standard council size is 7 members consisting of 2 Core Team councilors and 5 Community (standard/committee) councilors.

• Core Team Councilors: The Core Team Council size will be 2 unless a community Councilor joins the Core team. In this case, the person will move from the community to the core Councilor position and can be backfilled on the community team.

• Standard Councilors: There will be 5 Standard Councilors elected from and by the community. They shall: a. Review and vote on 80%+ Council items. b. Contribute to defining the council process.

• Committee Councilors: Up to 4 Standard Councilors may serve as Committee Councilors at any time. The are: a. Elected by the Council. b. Reclassified as standard Councilors voluntarily, through a Council majority vote or unilaterally by the Core Oversight Board. c. Regularly involved with the community to bring proposals forward d. Actively involved in creating, discussing, facilitating, documenting and deciding BIPs and/or council motions

• Chairbadger: If someone steps up to drive the council forward, a Chairbadger of the council may be appointed: a. The Chairbadger shall be appointed by a majority vote of both the core team Oversight Board and the Council. b. The Chairbadger may be removed by a super majority of at least 5 council members or unilaterally by the Core Oversight Board.

• Expert Advisory Support: The Council is authorized and encouraged to retain: a. Technical writing support focused on policy and law. b. Technical writers and advisors to support making informed decisions.

Councilor resignation and replacement:

• Resignation: Council members may resign at any point.

• Replacement: Council members can be forced to resign from the council with an affirmative vote by at least 5 of the other councilors.

Vacancies:

• The Core Oversight Board will appoint a core team member to fill in a vacant seat.

• During this time the council will, through some process of their own choosing, identify candidates who will then be selected/ratified through a snapshot vote.

• Appointments will stand until a successful snapshot vote is completed.

Council Term and Elections

Community involvement in governance is a critical aspect of Badger DAO. In support of this a snapshot vote to re-elect or replace council members will be held every 6 months. The last Council vote completed on March 30, 2022 and so the next one will occur on Sept. 30, 2022, and so on.