MIP4c2-SP3: MIP9 Amendments

MIP4c2-SP3: MIP9 Amendments

Preamble

MIP4c2-SP#: 3
MIP to be Amended: MIP9
Author(s): Charles St.Louis (@CPSTL), @LongForWisdom, Rune Christensen (@Rune23) 
Contributors:
Status: Formal Submission (FS)
Date of Amendment Submission: 2020-05-28
Date of ratification: <yyyy-mm-dd>

Specification

Motivation

This amendment MIP proposes some minor language edits and addresses some inconsistencies detailed throughout MIP9. More specifically, the proposed change will update the MIP to be consistent in saying that the Community Greenlight process will occur before the Domain Greenlight process, that Community Greenlight Polls will run for two weeks (including the details as to when they begin and end), and separating the components to increase clarity surrounding the overall process requirements and outcomes.

In summary, the amendments in this proposal affect the overall Collateral Onboarding MIPs Set and the previously ratified collateral onboarding process. More specifically, it rearranges the collateral onboarding process to allow MIP9 to occur before MIP8.

Amended Components

  • Paragraph Summary

    • Update paragraph to reflect the newly proposed period for when the Community Greenlight Polls begin and end.
  • Component Summary

    • Create new components to separate further and clarify the content of the already existing components.
  • MIP9c1: The Community Greenlight Requirements and Process

    • Create new bullet points to detail further the Community Greenlight process and the criteria that must be met in order for the community greenlight polls to begin.
    • Update the overview diagram to reflect the new collateral onboarding flow.
  • MIP9c2: The Community Greenlight Outcomes

    • Further, explain the details of the “greenlit” status outcome of the poll and what it means for a collateral type after it has become “greenlit”.
    • Further, explain the details of what the “deferred” status outcomes of the poll and what it means for a collateral type after it has been “deferred”.
    • Add details as to how the Community Greenlight Polls are scored.
  • MIP9c3: The Community Greenlight Requirements

    • Add the Governance Facilitators’ responsibilities and requirements for the Community Greenlight process and how it affects the community.
  • MIP9c4: Community Greenlight Poll Template

    • Add an introduction to MIP9c4 and update the Community Greenlight Poll Template.

Amendment Pull Request (PR)

Relevant Information

  • n/a

Two comments:

In the pull request you propose to add the following:

Community Greenlight Poll Scoring

The polls are scored as follows:

  • Score = Yes Votes - No Votes
  • Score > 0 = Greenlit
  • Score < 0 = Deferred

Community Greenlight poll scores provide a reasonable first approximation of which assets domain teams should prioritize. However, this prioritization is not binding on the domain teams. Domain teams are free to determine the order in which they perform domain greenlights and domain work.

This seems to not take into account that the # of votes. The first time the community did the community greenlight poll the votes varied quite greatly (I believe the lowest participation currently is at 30k DAI whereas the highest voted one has over 70k). I believe this should play some part in it as well.

scores provide a reasonable first approximation of which assets domain teams should prioritize.

Specifically this could maybe be extended to say the score as well as the number of votes? One idea would be to define the score as:

Score = (Yes Votes - No Votes) * (Total Votes)

But we can probably come up with some thing better as this formula also has some flaws.

In addition, the current polls have very similar names:

Add TUSD as a Collateral Type - May 25, 2020
Should we add DMM to the Maker Protocol? - May 25, 2020

I propose we think of a better title and make it part of the poll template (MIP9c4: Community Greenlight Poll Template).