Should the Community Be the Final Arbiter in Grants Revocation Decisions ?

by 0x247e0896706bb09245549e476257a0a1129db418 (StrategicUnit)

Linked Pre-Proposal

Should the Community Be the Final Arbiter in Grants Revocation Decisions ?

Summary

This proposal seeks to determine whether the Decentraland Community should have the final say in the revocation of Grants through the DAO governance process, thereby aligning the decision-making process with the principle of decentralization.

Abstract

This proposal emphasizes the existing procedure where the Grant Support Squad and Revocations Committee can initiate a preventive pause or revocation of the Grant Vesting Contract when potential concerns are raised. However, this proposal suggests an enhancement to this process: the final decision on the revocation of the Grant Vesting Contract would be subject to the outcome of a Community vote. If the Community vote is in favor of the Grantee and against the revocation, the Grant Vesting Contract won't be revoked. In such a case, any preventive pause that had been initiated would be lifted and the Grant Vesting Contract along with its payments would be continued, and vice versa.

Motivation

The Decentraland DAO is the decision-making tool for MANA, NAMES and LAND holders in Decentraland’s virtual world. The DAO’s Grants Program is one of the best vehicles to help grow the Decentraland ecosystem and must be aligned with the main spirit of Decentraland - Decentralization. Currently, the revocation of Grants is done by the Revocations Committee, which may not fully reflect the Community's will. This proposal suggests that while the Revocations Committee should continue to exist and make the initial decision on whether a grant should be revoked, the final decision should rest with the Community, providing a safeguard mechanism to override the Committee's decision if necessary. Grants revocation decisions should not be delegated to a small group of individuals, instead, they should be resolved through the DAO's governance process, which was designed as a legitimate tool to mirror the Community's sentiments.

Specification

For a detailed overview of the proposed amendments, please refer to the Complete Specification.

These amendments are intended for integration into the current Revocations Committee Framework.

Conclusion

By allowing the Community to override the decisions of the Revocations Committee through the DAO governance process, we can ensure that the Grants Program remains a true reflection of the Community's desires and needs. The Revocations Committee will still play a crucial role in evaluating cases and making initial decisions, but also that the Community has a say. It strikes a balance between the need for specialized decision-making and the principle of decentralization.This proposal seeks to enhance the grant revocation process by aligning it with governance process and equip the Community with a clear protocol for handling relevant cases, thereby making procedure simpler and optimizing time.

This proposal is summarized due to technical limitations. To view it complete and vote on it, visit the DCL DAO Governance dApp