Sulkta-Coop/agora
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

made changes to authoirty-tokens and proposals.ms

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Jack Hodgkinson 2022-02-02 15:28:59 +00:00
parent 027053a233
commit 7ec8f731d4
2 changed files with 4 additions and 8 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

6
docs/tech-design/authority-tokens.md
View file

@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ This model naturally requires that any component of the system, desired to be ad
![Governance Authority Token UTxO flow diagram](../diagrams/GovernanceAuthorityToken.svg)
> Peter, 2022-01-24: You should add a link to what conventions you're following for you UTxO flows to the README
> Peter, 2022-01-24: You should add a link to what conventions you're following for you UTXO flows to the README
> Peter 2022-01-24: I think I see what's going on here, but it could use some annotations/additional description.
> Tx1, a.) A proposal is closed via Tx1, and the transaction emits a continuing `Proposal` and `Governance` UtXO,
@ -77,6 +77,4 @@ The ability to alter large swathes of the system being conferred by the ownershi
This should be sufficient to prevent loopholes. Delegating authority through validation or movement of tokens is often a necessary risk in blockchain systems and this problem is no more complex than others of its kind.
> 2022-01-24, Peter: Have you considered placing the validator hash of the effect script in the token name? This could tie a proposal to a GAT to a validator, instead of having any GAT work with any effect script.
> 2022-01-24, Peter: This section could use some additional explanation/pseudo-code of the what the GAT minting policy would look like and what additional validation logic would go into a governable component
There is scope for expanding GATs to make them more restrictive and therefore less dangerous. One proposal is to store the hash of the effect script within the GAT, thus allowing for the minting of 'bespoke GATs', which are only authorised to make changes allowed for in the effect hash.

6
docs/tech-design/proposals.md
View file

@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ This document gives an overview of the technical design of the proposals system
**Current status**:
Imported from Liqwid by [Emily Martins]. Underwent rewrite by [Jack Hodgkinson].Further amendments to the 'period table' should be considered. Outstanding remarks from Peter Dragos that require attention.
Imported from Liqwid by [Emily Martins]. Underwent rewrite by [Jack Hodgkinson].Further amendments to the 'period table' should be considered.
***
@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ Consider the following 'stages' of a proposal:
#### Draft phase
During the draft phase, the proposal script has been minted. At this stage, only votes in favor of co-signing the draft are counted. For the proposal to transition to the voting phase, a threshold of GT will have to be staked backing the proposal. This threshold will be determined on a per-system basis and could itself be a 'governable' parameter.
During the draft phase, the proposal script has been created. At this stage, only votes in favor of co-signing the draft are counted. For the proposal to transition to the voting phase, a threshold of GT will have to be staked backing the proposal. This threshold will be determined on a per-system basis and could itself be a 'governable' parameter.
#### Voting phase
@ -77,8 +77,6 @@ In the voting phase, users may utilise their stakes to vote in-favour or in-oppo
Upon completion of the voting phase, a proposal will either have been passed or failed. A delay between the passing of a proposal and execution of its effects will be enforced, to allow users to prepare for incoming changes to the system. It'll further give the system maintainers opportunity to intervene, in the case of a hostile action.
> Peter, 2022-01-24: How is this time decided? Are you familiar with the "Emergency Shutdown Mode" of MakerDAO, which we'll be adopting in LiqwidX? This is something that would, for the most part, need to happen ASAP. What sort of modularity exists or would you like to see?
#### Execution phase
Failed proposals will not be interacted with further. The only value they will contain is their state thread tokens, so nothing of worth is lost.