Note: Not to be confused with the core principles in #10. These principles are things we should bear in mind as we contemplate and design good governance.
Rely on what works
Let’s not reinvent the wheel where we don’t need to. We already know a great deal about good governance from corporate governance and real-world politics. In fact, we have thousands of years of research, thought, and best practice to learn from. Ideas such as democracy, term limits, checks and balances, and a multicameral system of government are best practices and are aligned with our values, including capturing the needs and preferences of as many stakeholders as possible, and ensuring that governance is fair, transparent, accountable, and free from corruption. While we cannot perfectly replicate these ideas in the Stacks ecosystem due to the challenges outlined above, we can seek to emulate them and borrow their best ideas.
Encapsulation and representation
The key idea put forth by this proposal is encapsulation and representation. The key insight is that we don’t need to know the identity of every single actor in the system. We only need to know the identities of a limited number of representative actors. Each of these actors serves as a person of record, or representative, for a constituency. All system actors are free to “run for office” as such a representative actor, a process which involves revealing and staking a known, off-chain identity. They are also free to become a constituent of an existing representative, or of multiple representatives. As long as the top-level representatives are known—which solves for Sybil resistance, allowing us to limit the number of such actors, ensure they are unique, impose term limits, and, if necessary, remedy bad behavior—then it doesn’t matter how many unique actors each represents.
Permissionless participation
Other things being equal, everyone should be free to participate, not only by joining the network but also by making their voice heard in its governance. The barrier to entry should be as low as possible, so as to make governance accessible to as many people as possible. This needs to be balanced against the idea of “skin in the game,” and Sybil resistance, which can be handled via Encapsulation and representation, as described above.
Minimum viable governance
We recognize that, at this early stage in the life of the community and of the ecosystem, governance should be kept to a minimum. Our goal is to introduce minimum viable governance: the minimum set of policies, procedures, and institutions necessary to set Stacks governance up for success and maximize the likelihood that our core values are upheld. We aim for a reasonable initial configuration of the governance system, with the flexibility for governance to evolve and mature over time. Even over the longer term, small, efficient, responsive governance is the goal, with most authority over decisions and resources devolved to the “edges of the network.”
Note: Not to be confused with the core principles in #10. These principles are things we should bear in mind as we contemplate and design good governance.
Rely on what works
Let’s not reinvent the wheel where we don’t need to. We already know a great deal about good governance from corporate governance and real-world politics. In fact, we have thousands of years of research, thought, and best practice to learn from. Ideas such as democracy, term limits, checks and balances, and a multicameral system of government are best practices and are aligned with our values, including capturing the needs and preferences of as many stakeholders as possible, and ensuring that governance is fair, transparent, accountable, and free from corruption. While we cannot perfectly replicate these ideas in the Stacks ecosystem due to the challenges outlined above, we can seek to emulate them and borrow their best ideas.
Encapsulation and representation
The key idea put forth by this proposal is encapsulation and representation. The key insight is that we don’t need to know the identity of every single actor in the system. We only need to know the identities of a limited number of representative actors. Each of these actors serves as a person of record, or representative, for a constituency. All system actors are free to “run for office” as such a representative actor, a process which involves revealing and staking a known, off-chain identity. They are also free to become a constituent of an existing representative, or of multiple representatives. As long as the top-level representatives are known—which solves for Sybil resistance, allowing us to limit the number of such actors, ensure they are unique, impose term limits, and, if necessary, remedy bad behavior—then it doesn’t matter how many unique actors each represents.
Permissionless participation
Other things being equal, everyone should be free to participate, not only by joining the network but also by making their voice heard in its governance. The barrier to entry should be as low as possible, so as to make governance accessible to as many people as possible. This needs to be balanced against the idea of “skin in the game,” and Sybil resistance, which can be handled via Encapsulation and representation, as described above.
Minimum viable governance
We recognize that, at this early stage in the life of the community and of the ecosystem, governance should be kept to a minimum. Our goal is to introduce minimum viable governance: the minimum set of policies, procedures, and institutions necessary to set Stacks governance up for success and maximize the likelihood that our core values are upheld. We aim for a reasonable initial configuration of the governance system, with the flexibility for governance to evolve and mature over time. Even over the longer term, small, efficient, responsive governance is the goal, with most authority over decisions and resources devolved to the “edges of the network.”