AIP-154: Governance Module Revision Discussion
info Proposal Overview
This discussion surface captures a governed proposal review lane. Detailed module revisions, release targets, and execution parameters can be treated as pending until a real governance backend is connected and the proposal record is verified.
Technical Specification
# Truth-first governance note
proposal_record: pending-backend-verification
discussion_mode: local-review
execution_parameters: not-attached
affected_modules: pending
release_target: pending
# Attach the verified governance record before treating any
# implementation values on this page as authoritative.Community Discussion
I fully support the quadratic voting implementation. We've seen whale manipulation in smaller parameter tweaks recently. However, I'm concerned about the veto_period of 48h. In a fast-moving exploit scenario, 48 hours might be too long to wait for a committee action to finalize?
Good point, DevX. The committee can act immediately; the 48h is for the *reversal* by the DAO. Funds are locked in a transition state until then.
Will this change the staking rewards calculation as well? Quadratic voting usually implies a shift in how power is distributed.
Discussion Pulse insights
Governance Timeline
Draft Proposed
Recorded in current governed session
Community Discussion
Local discussion state • Backend phase data pending
Final Review
Awaiting verified governance schedule
On-chain Voting
Awaiting verified governance schedule