Preamble to GP001
Why has this proposal been created?
Our understanding of GP001 is that it has been proposed in response to IoB #4 member participation in governance in order to instill a structure and culture of decision and proposal making in order to reduce the noise and increase the signal within a diverse community that seeks to be effective, transparent and inclusive in so doing.
In a decentralised organisation each member needs to take more responsibility not less. This proposal is just as much about ensuring that we as a community can enable that and at the same time assist the board in executing their representative responsibility.
What is a ToD?
A ToD is a Topic of Discussion as expressed by one or more valid members of the coop. This brings an issue to the attention of the coop. Typically a ToD may result in a proposal or decision being made.
How can we ensure effectiveness, transparency and inclusiveness?
To meet the objectives of effectiveness, transparency and inclusiveness we believe that a structured approach that is amenable to change as we mature is needed. To this end the proposal concentrates on processes that can be put into place that ensure members wishes and questions can be addressed in a timely manner in the open as much as is possible.
What do we recommend in order to achieve our objectives?
Therefore, we recommend that a process is established to harvest and curate Topics of Discussion (ToD) from the members. This process will be designed to ensure inclusiveness being easy to use, transparency because we shall log all items and decisions on those items, and effective by iterating to a just enough model to allow both board and executives to function at the speed they need to to ensure our collective success.
Can you describe the process at a high level?
In the first instance these processes will include a basic structure for submission, described herein, a process for their submission and curation which in first instance goes to the governance committee. The governance committee of RChain, as an agent of the board, will be responsible for their onward submission to the relevant part of the coop from the board, the executive, the various committees that are established or that will be established in the future. The RChain governance committee will also be responsible for applying curation criteria, described herein, and for selecting the right venue for the discussion to be had or question to be answered. A governance committee log (on RChain of course) will be used to record ToD’s and their consequences in the future and a transitional arrangement using a combination of github, googledocs and discord will be implemented.
What are the criteria for curation?
The criteria used for curation includes some notion of importance that can be counted. Counting maybe the impact on the coop financials as well as the number of members expressing interest in either a ToD. The counting of member interest could manifest as emoji polling on Discord.
What should the thresholds and triggers be for members expression of wish?
What are the values of the coop?
They are to be found in a link below but for completeness the list is:
• Democracy
• Equality
• Equity
• Solidarity
• Self-Help
• Self-Responsibility
And is based directly upon The International Co-operative Alliance.
What are the principles of the coop?
They are to be found in the link below but for completeness the list is:
• Voluntary and Open Membership
• Democratic Member Control
• Member Economic Participation
• Autonomy and Independence
• Education, Training, and Information
• Cooperation among Cooperatives
• Concern for Community
And is based directly upon The International Co-operative Alliance.
Why is there no process of arbitration?
We accept that one needs to exist and we expect the governance committee to put one together that is expected to be added as an amendment to this proposal. We expect that we will not need the process for a few months after GP001 is passed.
This process has been drafted in response to a member ‘Item of Business’ petition to the Co-op Board reference IoB #4 entitled “Member Participation in Governance”. IoB #41 instructed the Co-op board to:
- define some parameters by which a decision (to craft a deal, make an investment, or distribute staking tokens) can be deemed “important”
- institute a process for public deliberation to precede such decisions
To ensure that formal defined processes exist within the co-op:
- for co-op members to propose items of discussion to a governance body appropriate to the topic and/or to submit the item for public discussion by the membership, including the RChain Co-op board itself and all committees with the RChain Co-op,
This process applies to:
- The RChain Co-op. Other subsidiary organisations may subscribe to the process if they decide to do so in their local bylaws, articles or procedures.
- The membership of the coop including its officers and board.https://faq.rchain.coop
- Activities of partner organizations where they are conducted under the brand of, or in the name of the co-op.
All Topics of Discussion (ToD) are included in the scope of this process to the extent that all elements of co-op governance are required to include representation of members’ voice in line with the values and principles of the co-op and the charter of the Governance Committee. A ToD is anything that can impact or affect the RChain Co-op be it internal or external. In part the test of importance is driven by the demand from members and in part driven by the definition of strategic importance included in this proposal under the heading “Definition of ‘Board Level Significance’”.
The ToD process may involve appropriate democratic, peer-to-peer working group and member discussion and voting (‘expression of wish’ which may manifest as emoji voting in Discord in the first instance) mechanisms. Any outcome or answer of such discussion of question is normally advisory and non-binding on the board, but if rejected may be cited in support of exceptional measures as defined in the bylaws.
Constraint: There may be some ToD’s which could for example impact individual member privacy, or compromise legal or commercial processes. Such topics may be handled in a private forum, outside the scope of this process, if justified.
Candidate topics of discussion should first be discussed with other members so that there has been a degree of peer review before invoking this formal process. Discussion can take place in any appropriate collaboration channel or tool. Members must make reasonable effort to reach out to and at least inform all parties impacted in the candidate ToD.
Topics of discussion are normally raised in ‘business as usual’ agenda-setting process for the governance body relevant2 to the topic. Each committee, body or business unit has a membership representative who may be contacted in order to table the item in the agenda/decision-making process operated by that unit.
ToD’s may be raised where:
-
there is no obvious accountable/responsible body already in existing co-op governance to address the candidate topic, or
-
the ToD is deemed to be of ‘board level significance’3 and is not already on the Co-op Board agenda, or
-
the topic has already been submitted, but the proposer and a significant number of peers feel that the topic has not been properly addressed and requires escalation as a dispute or unresolved matter for arbitration and final settlement.
-
Create a ToD document, ideally, in collaboration with peers, that should include:
Title: short (50 char max) but informative
Description of ToD (no more than 1 page)
Context: link to previous discussion / documents and history of previous submission and outcomes.
Impact statement: on co-op ongoing costs, effort, third party / external impact, reputation, external valuation etc. (Must include timing of impacts, quantified wherever possible - link)
Benefits statement
(Must include timing of benefits, quantified wherever possible - link)
Implementation Costs, Plan and Risk Assessment (links)
Time frame for discussion - allowing reasonable time to adjust the ToD, if necessary, and for the proposed consultation mechanism
Governance Bodies to be advised: e.g. Board, Finance and Audit, or Governance (in the case of a governance change)
Mechanism proposed for expressing collective sentiment / making decision, including pre and post consultation. (This should be discussed with the Governance Committee)
Change Log to record any significant changes to the ToD (what, who, why, when etc) -
Submit the proposal to the Governance Committee as an agent of the board to review, register4 and agree an appropriate mechanism with the proposer(s).
1: More details of the background and intent of the original submission are here
2: See the RChain website Governance Overview or contact the Governance Committee for guidance.
3: See Appendix A for the criteria that determine ‘board level significance’
4: A reference will be allocated and an entry made in an appropriate decision log.
A ToD is deemed to have ‘board level significance’, and so requires the board to have the ToD tabled in an appropriate forum. If the ToD satisfies any of the following criteria:
Material impact on the overall value or reputation of the co-op (positively or negatively)
- Any proposal that does, or is likely to:
- provoke public media interest or comment beyond ‘domestic’ Rchain community discussion in public channels.
- be price sensitive in terms of Rchain community token value
- materially affect the value of any asset held by the co-op
Resource impact greater than $25000 (one time) or $12500 per month over and above agreed and published plans.
Resource impact greater than 20 man days over and above agreed and published plans.
Any asset acquisition / disposal greater than $25000 over and above agreed and published plans.
Any distribution of staking tokens - every proposed distribution is to be announced and listed in a community channel at least 10 days in advance so as to allow member proposed objections to be raised and discussed (if sufficient support for objection is obtained) and over and above agreed and published plans.
Any Third Party contract greater than $25000 over and above agreed and published plans.
Any changes to Values / Principles.
A significant number of peers is deemed to be 5% of current membership.
A ToD is deemed to have had a significant degree of peer review when it has been reviewed by 5% of the membership.
A separate working group is researching, developing and evaluating approaches and mechanisms, including processes tools and guidance, for digital democracy.
In the interim, Discord post reactions can be used to test community support for Topic of Discussion submissions.