P0 - WalletConnect Governance Initial Process

Proposals
65

Honestly I have never regretted participating in this project

1 Like
67

yeah that’s thrue, but dont forget for our community

70

This is an excellent and necessary foundation for establishing a robust governance system for the WalletConnect ecosystem. The structured approach and clear definition of roles for this initial phase (P0) are crucial for building trust and ensuring a smooth path toward decentralization.

To help build a stronger and more resilient governance model from the outset, here are some constructive suggestions for enhancing this framework:

  • While the proposal outlines the goal of evolving governance, the community would benefit from more specific, time-bound, or milestone-based triggers for transitioning from P0 to a more decentralized model (e.g., P1). Defining these triggers, such as reaching a certain number of active governance participants, a specific volume of successful proposals, or a date for the next governance review, would provide a clear and accountable roadmap.

  • The “Foundation Review” section lists valuable evaluation dimensions (feasibility, security, etc.). To further enhance transparency, consider publishing a weighted scoring rubric for these criteria. This would allow proposal authors to self-assess their submissions better and help the community understand the relative importance of each factor in the Foundation’s decision-making process.

  • The 7-day discussion period is a great start. To maximize its value, we suggest formally documenting a “Summary of Community Feedback” for each proposal. This summary, published by the Foundation at the end of the discussion period, would ensure all perspectives are accurately captured and demonstrate how community input directly influenced any refinements to the proposal or the final implementation decision.

  • The standardized structure is very helpful. One potential addition to the “Proposal” section could be an optional “Alternatives Considered” subsection. This would encourage proposers to demonstrate they have thought critically about different approaches and explain why their chosen path is optimal, fostering higher-quality discussions.

We look forward to submitting future proposals under this new structure and actively participating in the discussion forums. We also encourage the Foundation to consider publishing a tentative timeline or set of milestones for reviewing the P0 process itself, perhaps after a 3 or 6-month period, to formally assess its performance and plan the next evolution.

Thank you for laying this critical groundwork.

1 Like
71

so far so good , community oriented project have being doing great and will defiantly pass the test of time

72

Am I right? Voting take place on snapshot?