CureDAO requires a governance model to support its goal of building a decentralized, contributor-owned, and operated platform for enabling the creation of an open source software infrastructure for making analyzing health data easier.
While many aspects of this proposal will carry over post-launch, an initial structure for operating and for fair and equitable consideration for the talents and efforts made by members in the early stage of CureDAO’s development is important to strengthen the CureDAO community and align incentives.
Membership in CureDAO requires each member to hold a minimum of one (1) $GCURES token, which is the governance token of CureDAO.
A member is entitled to vote on all proposals, which are put before the CureDAO membership. Each member exercises the rights associated with their $GCURES tokens, as part of the formal voting process, and are encouraged to participate actively and regularly in the governance through CureDAO’s Discord and Discourse platforms.
Governance tokens can be obtained by providing funds or work-in-kind to the structure. Members have full governance rights and can participate in governance on Discord and Discourse (informally) and via token-based voting (formally).
A Laboratory member provides expertise and advice to CureDAO. Laboratory members should provide objective advice, and must declare any pecuniary interests when providing that advice.
Participation in Laboratories are not paid positions, with some exceptions. All recognition for contributions will be through $GCURES tokens, or other incentive schemes decided by members. Post-Launch, $GCURES tokens will be exchanged for the post-launch governance token for CureDAO at a predetermined conversion rate.
*Scope of Laboratories to expand post-launch.
Each Laboratory will have one or two Coordinators who provide the organizational cohesion for the Laboratory. They will be responsible for on-boarding and off-boarding Laboratory members and may define a specific structure for their respective Laboratory and how they operate, collaborate and get compensated, pending approval by CureDAO members.
A new Coordinator is onboarded through the following process:
- Any Coordinator can nominate anyone as a new Coordinator.
- Once a new Coordinator is nominated, another Coordinator can challenge the nomination within a week.
- If the nomination isn’t challenged, members of all Laboratories vote on the nomination by a poll attached to a Discourse proposal (of the nomination).
- If a majority of votes is in agreement, the nominated Coordinator is offered the position.
- If the nominated Coordinator accepts, they are officially onboarded as a Coordinator.
An existing Coordinator is offboarded through one of the following events:
- The Coordinator chooses to offboard themselves and gives notice at least two weeks in advance.
- Another Coordinator nominates the Coordinator for offboarding, and Lab Coordinators do not challenge the nomination within a week.
- $GCURES token holders vote to offboard the Coordinator in a phase 3 vote (Discourse + Snapshot).
Service Providers are members who provide services to CureDAO, such as development work, IP sourcing, and conversion to NFTs, marketplace services, drug development services outside of project scope, etc. Service providers are paid for their services in stable coins, offered tokens in exchange, or a combination thereof. On a case-by-case basis, service providers can also be paid in fiat.
Service Providers serve at the pleasure of the Laboratories, and compensation shall be negotiated by the Laboratory Coordinators responsible for each project or activity.
- CureDAO members are in control of all governance decisions by voting on CureDAO proposals. Proposals vary by type and follow the process specified below:
- CureDAO members’ votes are weighted by the amount of $GCURES tokens they own.
- Admin resolves proposals for formal token-based voting.
- Admin is a multi-sig consisting of the Laboratory leads and trusted individuals voted in by the community.
- CureDAO Laboratories consist of domain experts to help guide member decisions in various work streams and organizational processes. Laboratories can help define proposals to the CureDAO members.
- Laboratory meetings are scheduled and operated in the open, and the only requirement to join is being a holder of $GCURES tokens.
- CureDAO may engage service providers spanning patent attorneys, contract research firms, or third party experts to provide services to the DAO in exchange for compensation.
- The initial goal is to mimic successful execution patterns in the biotech and software industry. Over time, we expect further governance mechanisms to emerge around CureDAO.
- Phase I: Informal - A post in a CureDAO thread on Discord, or as a result of a Laboratory call.
- Community Support Indicated by Discourse or Discord Vote, or a vote during a Laboratory call.
- Phase II: Formal - Post on CureDAO Proposal Category with Template and Phase II tag
- Community Support Indicated by Discourse Vote
- Phase III: Upload to dao.CureDAO.org for token-based vote.
This phase facilitates an initial, informal discussion consisting of CureDAO members on Discord, or in the Ideas area of Discourse regarding potential proposals to CureDAO. Members can initiate a proposal in Phase 1 by posting their idea in the CureDAO ideas. This phase allows proposals to gather community insight for refinement before opening a formal poll. Project proposals submitted by externals are automatically generated and posted in the proposal channel.
For proposals to successfully pass from Phase 1 to Phase 2, at least 10 members must signal positive support. If a Phase 1 proposal discussion fails to garner momentum from the community, it is unlikely to become a successful proposal. If there are less than 5 votes within three days of posting, the proposal is voided.
Proposals that receive more than 10 votes are moved to Phase 2. This phase requires proposals to be posted in the CureDAO Proposals category on Discourse using the CureDAO Governance Proposal template (CDP) 2. Beside proper naming, the CDP template requires all proposals to include fields including but not limited to a Simple Summary, Abstract, Motivation, Specification, and Implementation.
In addition to these fields, Phase 2 proposals must include a single-choice poll on the proposal outcome giving the options “Agree”, “Agree with revisions” (requiring a comment), and “Disagree”. Participation should be restricted to trust level 1 and above and will be increased to trust level 2 at some point (see Discourse Trust Levels 1). The poll should result in a pie chart with results visible, as per this template:
Agree with revisions (please comment)
The proposal author is responsible to incorporate comments from “Agree with revisions” votes. If their comment is fully resolved, commenting authors are supposed to change their vote from "Agree with revisions” to “Agree”.
For proposals to successfully pass from Phase 2 to Phase 3, there must be one outcome with a relative majority of votes on a Discourse poll. Proposals in Phase 2 require support from two Laboratory leads, and at least 10 members to vote. If the relative majority of votes on the forum poll indicates the result “Agree” (including any resolved “Agree with revisions” votes), the proposal will pass to Phase 3.
Phase 2 proposals are moved to Phase 3 by editing the Phase 2 proposal post from the previous phase. It should reflect the forum poll result that received a relative majority of votes, and by updating the proposal’s tag to phase-3. Proposals that pass the Phase 2 forum poll must be locked in this forum and referenced on dao.CureDAO.org to become an on-chain Phase 3 vote.
Majority vote with 5% quorum of circulating token supply via formal token-based vote.
Soft Governance vs. Token-based Voting
In principle, as many decisions as possible should be made using a soft governance mechanism via Discord. As a general rule, on-chain votes are required for high-stakes decisions that fall under one of the following categories:
(a) revolve around the treasury and a certain level of expenses;
(b) revolve around the rules or the rules to change the rules [the constitutional process]; or
(c) revolve around membership and enforcement of norms [punitive measures].
Other decisions should be taken through soft governance.