Final Proposal Text:
SUMMARY:
- Either current multi-signature wallet signers, or new multi-signature wallet signers, of the assets and wallet(s) that have been described as community assets, associated with wallet(s) such as the ethereum cross-chain multisig wallet [0x9538D438d506Fc426dB37fb83daC2a0752A02757], be tasked with:
Determining, through an attorney, if the assets are free from any liability or claims;
If assets are free from liabilities or claims, or for the assets that are free from liabilities or claims, to liquidate them, exchange them for on-chain denomination(s) coins, and transfer them to the community pool (at this point the multi-signature wallet signers task is done);
Suggestive ways for governance to track, vet, and provide accountability for community pool grants from assets associated with this proposal (so that governance can start funding layer 1 and associated blockchain maintenance and/or development, and related infrastructure)
RATIONAL:
Given the recent willingness of the current signers of a multi-signature wallet, who may be willing to transfer what has been described as community assets back to the community for specified purposes (including, but not necessarily limited to, the ethereum cross-chain multisig wallet [0x9538D438d506Fc426dB37fb83daC2a0752A02757]);
Given that distributing a significant amount of finances, and therefore the ability to use finances to consolidate influence over the chain and a very specific vision of its future, to a very small group of people, in a way that can easily bypass governance decisions, or accountability from governance - accountability that would be appropriate for fiduciary responsibility, particularly of a sum of money in the millions, on a governance-based chain; Recognizing that in a general sense that those who hold the majority of usable finances, for practical purposes, are those who really will determine the direction and outcome of a particular project, organization, or chain; and given that as a governance-based chain, these aspects around vision of the chain, and how finances are used to determine the fulfillment of that vision, are to be determined by the whole of governance; and
Given that the documentation outlines community spend proposals as the legitimate way to spend funds in the community pool and that the community pool is “a special fund designated for funding community projects”; Given that the Terra whitepaper for this chain states that “…the Terra Protocol offers strong incentives for users to join the network with an efficient fiscal spending regime, managed by a Treasury, where multiple stimulus programs compete for financing. That is, proposals from community participants will be vetted by the rest of the ecosystem…”; and given that the community pool spend proposal and discussion method has been the method for vetting and distributing grants in this chain with success, it is proposed:
PROPOSAL:
That this vote be a vote of affirmation of the will of the Terra v1 governance community to ask the multi-signature wallet signers to:
- TASKS:
Hire an independent attorney to conduct a review to determine, to the best of the attorney’s ability, that the assets in the wallet(s) are free from liability or claims. The payment for the review of assets is to come from a Terra v1 community pool spend proposal that outlines proposed legal costs (preferably with one or more written quotes from an attorney), any reasonable reimbursements associated with this specific legal task, or any reimbursements that governance at the time of the community pool spend proposal deems appropriate, and any legal insurance for liability protection associated with this task. There are two options that can be taken regarding the Terra v1 assets used for the legal task:
Option 1: The community pool spend proposal to be deposited to an on-chain “legal wallet” (defined below) held in custody by, and administered by, the attorney for these specific expenditures; or
Option 2: The community pool spend proposal to be deposited to an on-chain “legal multi-signature wallet” (defined below) with the same signers as the off-chain multi-signature wallet(s) associated with this proposal.
Any remaining funds (if any) after the legal review has been completed, and reimbursements associated with the legal tasks have been made (if any), and distribution as governance outlined in the community spend proposal for the legal funds has been made (if any), is to be deposited back into the Terra v1 community pool. This transfer of any remaining funds in the “legal multi-signature wallet” (defined below), or “legal wallet” (defined below), shall happen no later than the other assets associated with this proposal are transferred in full, after conversion, to the community pool.
- “LEGAL MULTI-SIGNATURE WALLET” / “LEGAL WALLET” DEFINED (ALL OTHER REFERENCES, UNLESS EXPLICIT, REFER TO THE MULTI-SIGNER WALLET(S) ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPOSAL):
- For the purposes of this proposal, the “legal multi-signature wallet” or “legal wallet” shall be a wallet created as a result of a Terra v1 governance community pool spend proposal that is only for legal costs, or associated reimbursements, outlined in this proposal, or any other further expenses that governance agrees to in a proposal that passes. All other references to wallet(s), or multi-signature wallet(s), unless explicitly specified otherwise, are to be associated with assets, either on-chain or off-chain, regarding the current signers of a multi-signature wallet, who may be willing to transfer what has been described as community assets back to the community for specified purposes (including, but not necessarily limited to, the ethereum cross-chain multisig wallet [0x9538D438d506Fc426dB37fb83daC2a0752A02757]).
If the assets are considered free from liability or claims then to liquidate the assets through either a dark pool, over the counter, or if necessary, on market directly, and then convert them to on-chain assets for the Terra v1 blockchain, and send the assets to the Terra v1 community pool.
If the current multi-signature wallet signers are not willing to do the above, after further discussion, and a new multi-signature wallet, or new multi-signature signers for the current wallet(s), are required to do the above stated tasks, then:
NEW WALLET SIGNERS (IF REQUIRED):
9 of the validators that are the greatest voting power shall be selected, with Vegas Validator being disqualified, for those willing to serve as signers, and moving to the next validator, until 9 validators are in agreement of accepting the responsibility. 7 of 9 signers will be required to initiate transactions for the wallet.
If there are still remaining signer slots to be filled, due to not enough validators being willing to do this task, then the remaining slots shall be filled through an election of Terra v1 governance community members. For purposes of the election, a candidate must show in the proposal description that they have staked coins on-chain by doxxing their Terra v1 wallet address that verifies there are staked coins (this will be the same wallet address that will be used for any “legal multi-signature wallet” signer or signer address of any on-chain wallets associated with the assets being transferred back to the Terra v1 governance community which this proposal outlines). The election shall be conducted through the Terra v1 governance system. The first number of candidate proposals that have passed, that meet the number of required remaining signer slots, and have given contact information to the “coordinator” (defined below), will be selected. It would be helpful for any election candidates to also outline their participation in the Terra v1 governance community. In addition the signer will have to sign a legal document and be verified using legal identification by an attorney (outlined in detail below). The details of the election, and any independent verification of it, and/or coordination of it, shall be outlined by the “coordinator” (defined below).
For the purposes of this proposal, the “coordinator” shall coordinate with validators, and the Terra v1 governance community, for the purpose of verifying potential validators willing to serve as signers, detailing specific times and dates regarding validator selection or community elections for signers, and otherwise coordinating, organizing, and communicating any Terra v1 community elections for those who may be willing to serve as signers if needed, independently verifying required documentation has been signed by the independent attorney for signer roles to be official, independently verifying required legal identification has been received by the appropriate attorney, independently verifying any legal matters pertaining to this task, reporting back to the Terra v1 governance community via the official proposal discussion platform that verification has been successful for all signers, and independently confirming to the current multi-signature wallet signers the persons to serve as signers for the purposes of any wallet(s) associated with this proposal (particularly for transfer of signer roles from current signers to new signers).
- The “coordinator” shall be the person who opened the proposal discussion for this proposal in the official proposal discussion platform, or if he is not able to serve, or designates, then the co-signer or other signer listed in either the proposal discussion for this proposal (or also listed at the bottom of this proposal). The website address for the proposal discussion is listed at the bottom of this proposal.
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF NEW SIGNERS TO ACCEPT OFFICIAL SIGNER ROLE (AND TASKS):
In order to accept responsibility as a signer, with the exception of being a signer on the “legal multi-signature wallet” (if that option is chosen), the person in question will sign a legal agreement to do what has been outlined above in the section TASKS (outlined for current signers of the multi-signature wallet), as well as any other pertaining aspects outlined in this proposal, in obtaining a legal review of assets in question, and then liquidate, convert to a Terra v1 denomination(s), and transfer all assets in question to the community pool. It is required under this proposal that the legal agreement will be drawn up by the (or an) independent attorney, and will include all provisions from this proposal. The legal agreement will be held on file with that attorney (or a legal service). The attorney referenced (or a legal service), will make their name as an attorney, or firm name, or service name (if a legal service), and address, publicly known for any legal requests that are made for legal purposes by another attorney. The attorney (or service name) and address shall be communicated back to the Terra v1 governance community, through the official proposal discussion system, after independent verification, by the “coordinator”.
No person shall serve as a signer, with the exception of being a signer on the “legal multi-signature wallet”, without having presented legal identification, with visual confirmation, to the attorney’s satisfaction, their names are signed to the legal document required for being a signer on the multi-signature wallet(s) (with the exception of the “legal multi-signature wallet” for the purposes outlined for the “legal multi-signature wallet”), and thereby having accepted the role of official signer. If a person has not signed the legal document, or does not meet the legal identity qualifications, they are thereby rejecting any further role or action with the multi-signature wallet or its assets (and shall be removed from the “legal multi-signature wallet” by the remaining signers). The independent attorney (or legal service) will provide a statement that is publicly posted that this identification and required signature process has been completed, and will be posted on the official proposal discussion forum by the “coordinator”.
INSURANCE OR INDEMNIFICATION:
- Signers may use funds from the “legal wallet” at the attorney’s administration, or the “legal multi-signature wallet” (if that option was selected), to purchase legal insurance associated with their role as a signer. If reasonable insurance is not available, then reasonable legal costs for representation (solely on the basis of their position as a signer) regarding any claims against the signer may be applied for through a separate community spend proposal, to the degree that amount required is available in the community pool, and as long as it does does not arise as a result of abuse of their position as a signer (including violation of fiduciary responsibility), violation of the legal agreement they signed as part of their responsibility as a signer, or any aspect of negligence as part of their duty as a signer of the multi-signature wallet.
BOUND BY TERRA V1 GOVERNANCE (WHERE APPROPRIATE):
- Those who fill active signer slots of the multi-signature wallet(s), or the “legal multi-signature wallet” (if that option was selected), as well as the attorney actively administering the “legal wallet” (if that option was selected), will be bound by Terra v1 governance proposals that pass which are associated with this overall task as outlined in this proposal - to the degree that the Terra v1 governance proposal is not illegal, would not put a person in a legally liable situation, or is not outside the jurisdiction of the Terra v1 governance community.
GOVERNANCE PROCESS FOR FUTURE GRANTS ASSOCIATED WITH ASSETS OUTLINED IN THIS PROPOSAL (MULTI-SIGNER ROLE IS DONE AT THIS POINT AND DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS SECTION):
This section is suggestive in the sense that it deals with community spend proposals, and once a community spend proposal has been passed by governance, the funds are transferred (whether this process is followed or not). But, this section gives steps that governance can use to track, vet, uphold a streamlined milestone project approach, and communicate expectations to a project applying for a grant, regarding the assets that are associated with this proposal, through the Terra v1 governance system.
That if the funds were transferred to the community pool from the multi-signature wallet(s) associated with this proposal, each community spend proposal seeking a grant from these funds would need to specify in the official proposal discussion system:
That the potential grant recipients are: “seeking funds associated with assets transferred to the community as a part of proposal [this proposal number]” (if a proposal discussion, and/or proposal, does not include this notification, then it will be considered a grant proposal against general funds in the community pool, and not from these particular funds within the community pool).
Each segment of governance (individuals, Terra v1 Community groups, and the Foundation that has been established as part of proposal 8813), will be responsible to help educate their followers about terms of funding requirement minimum expectations from these assets, and make sure to engage with grant proposal discussions in order to help provide appropriate vetting of grant proposals by asking those seeking grant proposals appropriate questions and ask them to make appropriate documentation, financials, and plans available within their proposal discussions.
That grants sought, as a result of these assets associated with this proposal, should follow the following outline of milestones (as a minimum):
Projects where total funding sought is under $30,000 equivalent (no milestone requirements, but must make case for needs and should have some aspects of requirements and design complete to what would be appropriate for an angel investor presentation)
Projects where total funding sought would be equal to or greater than $30,000: It goes through 3 funding rounds based on minimum milestones (this means that the initial round seeking funding would be requested in order to complete milestone 1, which must be completed before seeking funding for milestone 2, etc.):
- 1 ) requirements and design
- 2 ) code complete and test ready (or appropriate project management milestone for any potential non-software development specific aspects toward Layer 1 software development or Infrastructure), and
- 3 ) product tested, reworked, and shipped/accepted/deployed (with appropriate external best practice and security review)
That remaining funds available for grants, as part of the multi-signature wallet(s) associated with this proposal, are to be stated by the proposer in their proposal discussion seeking a grant, as well as in their proposal. In order to determine the amount of assets available, the proposer will research all previous proposals which have passed that have requested funds as part of the multi-signature wallet(s) associated with this proposal, and subtract those coins from the the amount of coins sent to the community pool from the multi-signature wallet(s) associated with this proposal. The amount reported will be coins available before the proposer’s proposal is submitted, and will be accompanied by the original multi-signature wallet(s) transaction id(s) to the community pool, and a list of all proposals that had passed seeking grants using assets from the multi-signature wallet(s) associated with this proposal (to be reviewed and checked by those partaking in the discussion, and stating their agreement or disagreement - along with their own research).
It is up to the proposer to fully outline all aspects of the milestone requirements regarding their project, and answer appropriate questions. If the proposer does not do this, governance should not vote to accept the grant proposal (either as an original proposal, or as a follow-up funding round based upon the appropriate milestone that has been completed, and reported, allowing for the proposer to seek funding for the next milestone for the project in question).
This proposal allows for the use of smart contract(s) to help accomplish the above, although does not necessarily require them.
While all parties attempt to seek to provide this level of accountability and vetting expectations of milestones, it is still recognized that an individual may create a proposal for a community pool spend proposal outside of these guidelines (however, it would be up to governance to provide the review required for the above minimum guidelines for those seeking grants through the community pool for the purposes of the funds associated with this proposal).
Proposal signed by: Vegas, A.E. (aeuser999)
Proposal co-signed by: Raider70 (raider7019)For further proposal discussion see: