Proposal: Solace Governance Formation


The proposal outlines the basis of Solace’s future operational governance. It seeks to establish a clear framework for decision-making and management of the organization that ensures decentralization and efficiency. The proposed governance model is inspired by Yearn, Balancer, and Aave governance models. It defines the role of SGT token holders in governance and clarifies the nature and scope of the powers delegated to the Multisig, a group of multisig signers who act as a council to execute decisions made by SGT holders.


If adopted, this proposal will:

  • Define the role of SGT holders in governance and the types of proposals available to them.
  • Formalize the delegation of certain powers to the Multisig.
  • Clarify the nature and scope of the powers delegated to the Multisig.
  • Define the process for the regular election of Multisig representatives.
  • Delegate certain powers to a group of Solace contributors.


SolaceDAO’s current governance model does not provide a clear path for SGT token holders to participate in decision-making. To operate as a fully decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), we must shift away from a model where the founding team holds major control over the protocol. Instead, we need a more inclusive, decentralized governance model where SGT holders have the ability to regularly select SolaceDAO Multisig representatives, submit proposals, and vote on key decisions. By implementing this approach, we ensure that all stakeholders have a say in the direction of SolaceDAO, resulting in transparent and equitable decision-making.


SGT Holders

In the Solace protocol, SGT token holders play a crucial role in governing the platform. They can submit proposals for changes to the protocol, ranging from simple bug fixes to major upgrades that fundamentally alter the way the protocol operates. Once a proposal is submitted, it is reviewed by the community and, if deemed worthy, is put up for a vote.

Voting is done through a snapshot vote, where SGT holders can use their tokens to signal support for or against the proposal. The number of votes needed to pass a proposal is determined by a predefined quorum, which ensures that changes to the protocol have widespread support.

Governance process

We suggest to establish a three-step process for submitting proposals to ensure that the SolaceDAO community has a clear and transparent process for proposing and implementing changes to the protocol:

  1. Create a Solace Request for Comments (SRC) and share it on the forum to gauge sentiment and preferences before submitting a formal proposal.
  2. Prepare a Solace Improvement Proposal (SIP) along with the necessary payloads for on-chain execution. The SIP should include a motivation section outlining the reason for the proposal, an English specification describing exactly what the proposal will change and its effects on the protocol or treasury balance, and a risk assessment section outlining potential risks to the protocol.
  3. Submit the SIP to the protocol for a governance vote. If successful, the SIP will be executed and implemented by the Multisig.


A group of multisig signers act as a council to execute decisions made by SGT holders through snapshot voting. This council uses a Gnosis Safe Multisig to execute decisions on-chain, ensuring that the changes are implemented securely and efficiently. The council also provides support to community members throughout the governance process.

The Multisig signers are elected by the community and can have a maximum of 9 members. They hold the power of veto in case they deem a decision requires further review. The election of Multisig signers is an important aspect of the Solace governance process, as it ensures that the council represents the interests of the community and is accountable to its members.

Election of Multisig Signers

If this proposal with the general outline is approved, a separate proposal outlining the specific election process for the Multisig signers will be proposed. This specific proposal will be subject to community approval through a snapshot vote. It’s worth noting that the specifics of the election process may differ from what is described here, as the community will have the final say in determining the process.

To be eligible for election as a Multisig signer, a community member must hold a certain amount of SGT tokens, which will be determined by a community vote. Candidates can apply for consideration by the community, and their applications will be reviewed by the existing Multisig council.

Once the review process is complete, the candidates will be added to a governance vote for SGT token holders to choose from. The number of Multisig signers will also be determined by the SolaceDAO community through a snapshot vote, with a maximum of 9 signers.

At the end of each term, the community will elect new Multisig signers to replace outgoing members, following the same election process. This ensures that the Multisig council remains accountable to the SolaceDAO community and continues to represent the interests of its members.

Decision-Making Powers

Power Delegation
Manage Powers SGT Holders
Change SGT Token Contract SGT Holders
Set Fees SGT Holders
Change Multisig Signers SGT Holders
Spend Treasury Funds Multisig
SIP Power SGT Holders
Execution Power Multisig
Veto Power Multisig
Transitionary Power Multisig
Emergency Powers Multisig
Manage Protocol Multisig
Delegate Transactions Multisig
Pay Team Multisig
Set Budgets Multisig
Farm Treasury Multisig
Ratify Multisig Signers Multisig

The Future

This proposal presents a decentralized governance model that is powerful, flexible, and innovative, addressing two critical needs:

  1. providing clear control to SGT holders and

  2. empowering the team to execute with speed.

While DAOs are still in their early stages and there is much to be learned, we believe that trust is at the core of every successful implementation. Our model aims to prioritize trusted relationships and give SGT holders the ability to modify them directly.

With this proposal, we hope to establish a foundation for future implementations of decentralized governance that can evolve and improve over time.

  • Proceed with this proposal in its current form?
  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

1 Like

From Discord, I’d like to understand what the point of voting with SGT if the Multisig/Members have Veto Power?


Great proposal @amir, but I agree with @cioppinodog and also don’t think that Multisig’s powers should include veto power. Additionally I believe that setting budgets and treasury spending (including any potential farming with the treasury funds) should be voted by SGT holders, rather than at the discretion of Multisig signers.

1 Like

Up to 9 Multisig signers but how many need to sign for a prop to be executed onchain?
Thinking about this in terms of signers removing signers without a prop. How many signers would need to go rouge to take over the multisig and drain any Treasury Funds?


Could you please provide more information about the mechanisms in place for resolving disagreements or conflicts that may arise during the governance process? This could involve disputes between community members or between the community and the Multisig council.

It is crucial to have a well-defined and transparent process for addressing such issues in order to maintain trust and harmony within the community, while ensuring efficient decision-making. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this matter.


I fully support this proposal!


Very well thought through. Agree with Nikita on comment above.


I think 5 out of 9 signatures should be sufficient and represent majority.

1 Like

Good point, however I think the governance process is itself a conflict resolution process. Multisig council is not a decision maker, so any disagreements would be settled at a voting stage past discussions.