The Celo governance process is built on the principles of transparency, decentralization, and community-driven decision-making. As the ecosystem matures, refining governance mechanisms is essential to maintaining efficiency and inclusivity.
One key area for improvement is the timing of proposal approvals. In certain instances, proposals that have reached quorum and secured a majority of “yes” votes have not progressed due to missed approval windows. Addressing this procedural challenge will help strengthen Celo’s governance framework and ensure a more seamless decision-making process.
Understanding the Challenge
Under the current governance structure, proposals require approval from designated multisig approvers after passing the voting stage. If approvers do not sign within the allotted timeframe, the proposal is rejected, even if it has garnered the necessary support.
While some approvers actively monitor proposals throughout the voting period, others may wait until the voting stage concludes, leaving only a short two-day execution window for approval. This dynamic presents several challenges:
- Increased workload for proposers, who must resubmit their proposals and secure votes again, adding administrative complexity.
- Potential misunderstandings within the community, as missed approvals may be perceived as intentional roadblocks rather than procedural oversights.
- Reduced engagement in governance, as inefficiencies in the approval process can discourage participation and limit constructive contributions.
Historical Examples
Several proposals have encountered these approval timing challenges, including:
- #207 Celo Communities Guild Proposal 2025 H1 Budget
- #203 Launch of the cGHS Stablecoin
- #192 Creation of Celo Governance Guild
- #112 EuropeDAO Proposal
These proposals met the required quorum and had majority support but were ultimately rejected due to missed approval windows. Enhancing governance procedures can help ensure that such situations do not become recurring obstacles.
Potential Solutions
To improve governance efficiency and ensure that approved proposals move forward as intended, they propose the following enhancements:
Encouraging Early Approvals
Approvers could begin reviewing and approving proposals at the start of the voting stage rather than waiting until the execution phase. If a proposal is pre-approved and subsequently reaches quorum with a majority “yes” vote, it will be ready for execution without further delay.
Extending the Approval Window
Providing additional time for approvers to review and sign proposals may help mitigate timing constraints and prevent missed approvals.
Enhancing Transparency Through Status Updates
Implementing a public dashboard or notification system could keep the community informed about pending approvals and improve accountability.
Strengthening Approver Accountability
Establishing clear expectations for timely approvals and implementing a structured rotation for inactive approvers can help maintain an effective governance process.
Expanding Approval Delegation
Allowing a broader set of trusted community members to approve proposals when designated approvers are unavailable could help ensure governance continuity.
Creating Specialized Approver Roles
Introducing a system where some approvers can review all proposals while others focus on non-technical approvals, such as funding requests or temperature checks, could distribute the workload more effectively. This distinction could help technical approvers focus on complex proposals while allowing non-technical approvers to handle simpler ones, reducing operational bottlenecks.
Conclusion
By addressing these challenges, they can further refine Celo’s governance model, ensuring it remains efficient, transparent, and aligned with the needs of the community. What are your thoughts on these proposed changes? Do you have additional perspectives or alternative suggestions? You can read more about this here.
Creative web3 writer and blogger with over 6 years of experience.
Post Comment