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.