YIP-1: Proposal Mechanics

Trent Elmore, Brock Elmore, Will Price, Clinton Bembrey, and Dan Elitzer propose the following items to serve as proposal mechanics during the transition from YAMv2 to YAMv3. Should this proposal be passed, past and future proposals that do not conform to these mechanics will be considered invalid.

While the original launchers of Yam will be submitting proposals, this framework is intended to make clear that anyone meeting the minimum requirements is able to submit proposals, some of which may supersede ours. The power and value of YAM lies in the YAM community, and we are excited to see what the community brings to the table in this interim period and in YAMv3.

It should be noted that any proposal may not be implemented without approval from the YAM community.

We're also thrilled and humbled by the support we've received from many in the DeFi community that have rallied behind us. One special shout out we'd like to give is to the Balancer and Snapshot Labs teams who built and are hosting this governance portal. This was something they did not have to do but graciously offered as we sought ways to limit our influence over this process.

Item 1:

We propose a 3 day minimum voting period, with a maximum voting period of 7 days. This will ensure tokenholders have adequate time to assess proposals and vote, while also ensuring an efficient process.

Item 2:

We propose all proposals must have a deadline prior to September 7, 2020, to ensure adequate time for code implementation prior to audit. This means the latest that a proposal can be submitted is September 4, 2020.

Item 3:

We propose that all proposals not approved by the deadline must be resubmitted in YAMv3 governance to be considered for implementation.

Item 4:

We propose that a minimum of 100 YAMv2 be required to submit a proposal. This is to prevent proposal overload and ensure an efficient V2 to V3 governance process.

Item 5:

We propose to utilize the 4% quorum requirement initially set in V1 for approval of YAMv2 governance decisions.

Item 6:

We propose that when submitting a proposal, a block height for a snapshot of balances must be chosen. The snapshot of balances will serve as ground truth for voting power. This block must be the current block at the time of proposal start time (+/- 15 minutes). Any proposal found not to do this will be disregarded and considered invalid, even if it achieves sufficient votes.

Item 7:

We propose that in the event of conflicting approved proposals, priority will be given to the proposal that was approved most recently.