Abstract
This proposal introduces the Wormhole Governance Proposal Process.
The proposal will go to an onchain vote for ratification on May 23, 2025 using Tally, powered by MultiGov. Ratification will require reaching quorum which is set to 350M W tokens at initiation of Wormhole Governance.
Wormhole Governance Proposal Process
Steps Employed in the Proposal Process
1. Idea Development
- Purpose: The initial phase allows community members to brainstorm, refine, and discuss ideas informally. It is very important that conversations are stimulated to introduce participation and minimize pushback during the later stages of the proposal life cycle.
2. Draft Proposal Submission
- Proposals are required to include:
- Title and clear objective.
- Lead author and any co-authors.
- Problem statement and proposed solution.
- Technical or resource details.
- Expected outcomes and KPIs.
- Proposals lacking detail may remain in the forum for idea refinement. The Governance material should emphasize the importance of completeness and clarity before advancing to later stages.
3. Community Comment Period
- Timeline: This period will last a minimum 5 days during which community members provide feedback, raise concerns, and suggest improvements.
- Platform: Comments are posted on the Wormhole Governance forum thread with sections for questions, concerns, and endorsements.
4. Temperature Check Phase
- Process: Proposals advancing to this phase undergo an off-chain vote using Snapshot.
- Thresholds: The quorum is set to 115M W tokens at initiation of Wormhole Governance.
- Timeline: The Temperature Check off-chain vote will run for 3 days.
5. Final Proposal Submission
-
Upon successful completion of the Signaling Phase off-chain vote, formal proposals will be published to the forum. This proposal should be the final draft and should reflect any changes to the original proposal.
-
Timeline: This stage will allow for a minimum 3 days for community members to complete final review and discussion before the final vote stage.
-
Requirements: Proposals must include:
- Title and clear objective.
- Problem statement and proposed solution.
- Technical or resource details.
- Expected outcomes and KPIs.
6. Voting Phase
- Process: Proposals advancing to this phase undergo an onchain vote using Tally, powered by MultiGov.
- Thresholds: The quorum is set to 350M W tokens and the proposal threshold is set to 1M W tokens at initiation of Wormhole Governance.
- Timeline: The Voting Phase is comprised of the following periods:
- The voting delay is 2 days, to provide token holders with time to move their tokens and delegate their voting power in advance of the vote.
- The voting period is 5 days.
7. Implementation and Monitoring
- Execution: Approved proposals proceed to implementation. There is a timelock delay of 4 days for approved proposals.
- Please note that proposals with onchain execution will not be accepted.
Timeline Between Phases
- Idea Development: Ongoing and unstructured.
- Draft Submission: It is encouraged that all ideas spend the necessary time in the Idea Development phase before drafts are submitted, but this is not a necessity.
- Community Comment Period: minimum 5 days.
- Signaling Phase: 3 days
- Final Proposal Submission: 3 days
- Voting Phase: 7 days
- Timelock Execution Delay: 4 days
- Implementation: Dependent on the proposal’s specifics.
Veto and Resubmission Policy
- Reasons for Veto:
- Legal non-compliance (determined by the Foundation).
- Resubmission:
- Vetoed proposals may be resubmitted after a 30-day cooldown, provided they address the reasons for rejection.
- No additional review mechanisms are planned for repeatedly vetoed proposals.
4 Likes
Thank you to the Wormhole Foundation for formally kicking off DAO governance with this foundational proposal. Establishing a transparent and structured governance process is a critical step for any decentralized community, and we’re excited to see Wormhole taking this important step forward.
We’re supportive of the proposed governance framework. It follows a familiar and battle-tested structure, mirroring established DAO processes, with sufficient timeframes at each stage to allow for deliberation, feedback, and delegate activity. The inclusion of a 2-day voting delay and a 4-day timelock post-vote are particularly prudent measures that contribute to the safety and reliability of governance outcomes.
That said, we would like to request clarification on one particular point:
This line introduces some ambiguity. If the intent is to exclude arbitrary or technical onchain execution tied to proposal outcomes, it would be helpful to clarify how implementation is expected to proceed in practice, especially for governance decisions requiring changes to contracts or token allocations. In its current form, this limitation may unnecessarily restrict the DAO’s ability to effectuate key decisions and evolve the protocol over time.
Could the Foundation provide additional context on what types of proposals are envisioned, and how decisions will translate into execution if onchain actions are categorically disallowed?
We appreciate the opportunity to provide input at this early stage and look forward to seeing Wormhole Governance develop into a robust and active ecosystem.
3 Likes
Hey Jose,
Thank you for your thoughtful feedback and support during the first steps of Wormhole Governance.
The current proposal reflects the initial phase of Wormhole Governance, which is intentionally scoped to prioritize deliberation, signaling, and community coordination. The Foundation recognizes the importance of enabling meaningful governance decisions that may eventually require onchain execution; however, onchain actions are out of scope for this first phase to allow the community to refine the governance processes and ensure proper infrastructure is in place before expanding capabilities.
The initial scope of governance will be shared next week, including types of proposals and their focus. Over time, as Wormhole Governance grows and expands, the expectation is that its scope will also expand.
Thank you again for your input!
2 Likes
looks good to me. excited to get wormhole governance started.
1 Like
Thanks for this suggestion @wormholefoundation Here is my feedback
-
For the comment period 5 days seem sufficient, but discussions often continue longer. The goal should be to be able to complete discussion, so having an additional clause which asks the author to wait 3 days till the last comment would be beneficial.
-
The Temp check vote period seems insufficient, especially considering when a vote goes up can define how many delegate participate. I suggest either increasing this period to 5 days or mandating start day on Monday or Tuesday.
-
While its great for inclusivity to not gate snapshot with a token threshold, there must be some way to avoid spam. I know snapshot offers this service.
Hey jengajojo,
Thank you for the suggestions. Please see responses to your raised questions below.
- The proposed comment period is defined as a minimum of 5 days. By defining a minimum it ensures that there is sufficient time and discussions can continue beyond this timeframe if needed. Enforcing a buffer after the last comments doesn’t seem necessary at this point, given a minimum threshold is defined. The preference is to encourage healthy discussions rather than enforce cooldown periods.
- The currently defined 3 day voting period is sufficiently long given that this is only a temperature check. If a change is needed in the future, it can be proposed and recommended down the line.
- The proposal doesn’t mention any specific Snapshot configurations for the Wormhole space because that space is not fully configured yet. Once fully live it will include proposal validation to prevent spam. A minimum threshold for new proposal submissions will be implemented, following guidelines and best practices.
Thank you for your input!
1 Like
Looks great! Is there any hard cap to the budget request for governance proposal?