POLICY 001: How to create a Frabric Policy Proposal

This discussion is designed to define and agree to the norms and systems used to create a Frabric Policy Proposal that successfully meets our organizational bar.

Why?

The Frabric needs people to function, and to ensure that we make the right decisions we need standing policies to ensure that we can create a safe and profitable machine that stands the test of time.

Comments

This is not an exhaustive list; we should flesh out these terms and statutes as part of this discussion. If there’s a missing section or a statute that should be added to this Policy, please add it here.

If this needs to be restructured or there is a better system for us to mimic, none of this is definitive and we can swap to that system.

Initial Steps

Discourse First

To start off; each Policy Proposal should have a discussion thread (like this), defined in the policy discussion category of the https://chat.thefrabric.com discourse server.

Discussion Window

Each discussion thread should have a 1 week window, at the end of the week a poll should be created to see if no further discussion is needed for ratification, with a overview of the decided upon Policy as the latest comment.

Ratification

If no dissenters vote against ratification, the Proposal discussion will be sent to The Frabric as a paper proposal with the overview provided as Proposal content, along with a link to the Policy Discussion Thread.

@arcology

1 Like

Thanks for this.

I would assume that the Discourse around a tentative proposal would be the ‘Signal Phase’ before it goes to on-chain governance platform for ratification.

I would suggest that a Policy Proposal in the Discourse should always have a poll at the outset of the initial post, with the following options as the minimum (assuming that its a binary choice)

  • Yes (agreement to the Proposal summary/contents as it stands)
  • More discussions needed (no decision has been made but more discussion is needed for clarification or for alternative options to be tabled for discussion)
  • No (objection to the Proposal summary/contents as it stands. Naysayers are encouraged to voice their reasons why)

I would also be a bit more specific and say that if the initial Signal does not pass (ie more objections than approvals), then the proposer should either abandon the proposal or come back with an amended one for further review and discussion. It could come back as the same Proposal Number if the content and scope are similar to the previous (rejected) proposal.

2 Likes
  • This proposal is reasonable and passes consensus
  • This proposal needs work, and I’ll add context

0 voters

Fully agreed, this poll will be open for 5 days, after we can ratify the system that Arcology and I have discussed