Governance Meeting Notes Mega-Thread

Abstract

  • A great discussion is occurring on the forums on the ‘Community asks from SF’ petition proposal thread with input from SF, SCRT Labs, and the community. In the next 24 hours the latest version will be shared there and the aim is to have it go on-chain Sunday or Monday. All feedback is welcome.
  • Starting next week (July 27th) the governance call will be brought one hour forward to 2pm UTC (3pm UTC outside of DST). The aim is that this will enable SCRT Labs to join more often.
  • For validators it is important to check their minimum gas fee setting after a migration as the default in secretd is still 0.25 uscrt. Over the past months several validators migrated their validator node without editing this value resulting in them not including most tx’s.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • There seems to be a majority among validators that would prefer a 5% minimum validator commission. A signal proposal related to this will be posted on the forums in the near future to verify this through on-chain governance.
  • The updated version of the Secret Network Charter & Code of Conduct should include a section related to Conflicts of Interest, specifically requiring proposers to disclose CoIs on a good faith basis.
  • Part of the community would prefer to also include a section in the SN Charter & CoC related to validators abstaining on spend proposals in case there is a CoI. Another part of the community strongly opposes this.
  • There seems to be a growing minority that would like to see pay rates be instituted, but the specific details surrounding this still remain open for discussion.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • The Secret Agency is having difficulty in finding people that are willing and able to be on the board. This might result in a smaller number of people putting their name on the NPO. Should be up and running in a few weeks.
  • Team Digiline is looking to put up a proposal for a secret DNS (based on the CCBL DNS bounty). They are looking for high-level feedback before moving into the forum discussion period.
  • An ‘express’ proposal type was brainstormed about, some more analysis of past proposals should help guide the discussion moving forward. “It’s totally useless until it’s useful, if it’s not an insane amount of work we should do it”.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • A proposal to support the launch of limit orders on buttonswap is currently in the on-chain voting period.
  • The Testnet committee has posted an update on the forums, and a new proposal for the upcoming period. There are still a few compensated testnet validators slots available, reach out to Taariq if you’re interested and are running a mainnet validator.
  • The Support Team will go to the forums next week with a new proposal that will overhaul the structure and lower costs.
  • There doesn’t seem to be a strong desire to increase the active set size in the near future. Therefore it seems that October would be the next target assuming the data indicates it is possible without affecting the chain.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • The roster of incentivized Testnet validators is now full and there is even a waiting list. Taariq is standing by for the testnet upgrade for Shockwave Delta in the coming weeks.
  • The new Support Team proposal has a strong focus on implementing and using Zendesk to automate most of the easy questions using the chat bot and the knowledge center. Metrics should be easier to track and response times shouldn’t be hurt too much by the reduced hours.
  • The minimum validator commission signal proposal will go to the forums later today after getting some last feedback right before the call. It will focus around the question whether a new governance parameter should be implemented to set a minimum validator commission rate.
  • Sifchain’s proposal #101 and its implementation resulted in a maximum voting power percentage for validators on their network, see the full notes for the discussion and brainstorm of how this could influence Secret Network in the future.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • A new proposal (#107) to increase the validator set was likely proposed on-chain by someone new to the network without following governance norms. It most likely concerns a new validator outside of the active set that may be unfamiliar with the network charter. The timing is unfortunate due to the upcoming upgrade and could have been prevented by having a forum discussion. These two things seem to be underlying most no votes.
  • The minimum validator commission fee floor discussion continues, if the community decides to implement it before it’s part of the cosmos SDK version we use it would be easier to implement it as a hard-coded value. It might be better to slowly increase the floor, for example starting at 1% instead of jumping to 5% immediately. More feedback will be sought before moving the signal on-chain.
  • We should gather data regarding chain performance and how validator set increases affect it before actually increasing the parameter. Smaller increases more regularly might be preferable over larger increases. 100 validators seems to be the goal most validators are looking to move towards, but after the upgrade, and with data to determine performance implications. Every increase in the set comes with an increased CPU and memory burden for all nodes.
  • The Secret Foundation Transparency Report will be presented next week during our next Monthly Governance call.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • The 22Q1 SF Transparency Report was presented today. It is a bit behind schedule due to competing priorities. The intention is to quickly release Q2 next month, and quickly thereafter Q3. Details in the full notes.
  • The Minimum Validator Commission Signal will likely change to contain a hardcoded value instead of a governance parameter due to practical considerations.
  • SF also presented a draft budget for the year ahead (not a 2023 budget), which is to act on a rolling basis. This is based on the current scope of SF and they do not expect significant increases or decreases in the upcoming year.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • There doesn’t seem to be a very strong feeling either for or against increasing the deposit amount. Most people present seem to be fine with an increase to 1000 SCRT (the old value) as deposits can be filled by multiple people.
  • A long and good discussion was had on the USC proposal as posted on the forums yesterday. Main goal was to clarify the community’s questions and concerns so they can be answered by the proposers.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • The Secret Network Charter should include a section on module integration, but it should not be overly complex and mainly focus on a longer discussion period.
  • DApp front-ends might not be ready for the upgrade by next Wednesday. There will be a forum thread later today to bring attention to this issue and potential solutions.
  • The USC module will not be part of the Shockwave Delta upgrade due to community feedback, discussion will continue on the forums.
  • The minimum validator commission signal proposal will go on-chain after the Shockwave Delta upgrade. It seems feasible to include this feature as a parameter in Shockwave Omega assuming the community would like it to be.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • The Shockwave Delta upgrade today was super smooth, a big thanks to everyone involved, especially SCRT Labs, SF, and the validators.
  • Enabling IBC tokens for gas fees on Secret Network would directly impact the value proposition of SCRT. It is up to individual validators to decide on fees, but consensus in the gov call seemed to be that fees should be limited to SCRT. Something could always be built by a dApp to allow other fees within their application if they would require it. Some would only agree to it if the fees for non-SCRT tokens would be significantly higher (in the order of thousands of times).
  • Voting power changes, for example needing delegators to vote themselves for the full voting power to count, or allowing stakers to delegate their voting power to non-validators do not seem to be high priority discussions.
  • A few community members would like access to the private validator chat to be public. Validators disagree and fear it would reduce contributions and hinder technical discussions. Once it was clarified that there tend to be no governance-related discussions, the need for a public chat seemed to be reduced.

Action Points

Full Notes

Abstract

  • Following the Shockwave Delta upgrade some very large transactions require more gas than the maximum allowed in a block. Proposal 112 should correct that by increasing the max gas per block to 8M.
  • The SF Q2 TR presentation is tentatively scheduled for October 12th.
  • Part of the community would like to move all taxes to the Community Pool moving forward, where funding can then be requested. This would change the default and hopefully create more alignment on the priorities between SF and the community.

Action Points

Full Notes