[Discussion] Community Signer Election

Thanks to @mZeroNine for co-authoring this post


As the mStable ecosystem grows, so does the need to decentralise it further. The previous post outlined a new and improved structure to put governance into the hand of the community first. A second step to add further decentralisation in a gradual matter is to allow prominent Metanauts that are outside of the core contributor team to participate in the governing bodies of mStable, namely the ProtocolDAO and TreasuryDAO (previously mStableDAO).

Since mStable’s inception, the roles of the signers in both DAOs have been filled with either core contributors or known members of the industry. This was done to mitigate the concentration of risk and to distribute power. Now with an established base of Metanauts around mStable, we should revisit these positions and allow more community participation and transparency.


The ProtocolDAO is a Gnosis Safe multi-sig, operating in a 4/8 threshold manner. The current allocation of signing bodies (according to this article) consists of is the following :

  • 4 Core Developers
  • 1 Core Contributor
  • 1 Co-founder
  • 2 Industry professionals

As the ProtocolDAO deals with core smart contracts and protocol functionality, it inherently requires knowledge about the underlying system and protocol. Therefore it is vital to keep the majority of the signer seats within the hands of core developers since they build and know the protocol the best. Additionally, a core contributor and a co-founder allow the ProtocolDAO to align within the wider strategy of mStable.

However, the seats of the 2 industry professionals can be reallocated to community members. The rationale being that community members are more involved with the protocol, stay up to date with governance more readily and have a greater interest in bringing the protocol to success.

To simplify the breakdown and to allocate the new seats, here is the proposed new breakdown:

  • 6 Core Contributors
  • 2 Community members


The TreasuryDAO is a Gnosis Safe multi-sig operating in a 4/6 threshold manner. The previous allocation of signer seats (according to this article) is the following:

  • 2 Core Contributors
  • 4 Independent signers

All remaining equal, the additional signer seat will be obtained via an expansion of the multisig. The threshold can stay the same and so we end up with a 4/7 multi-sig.

  • 2 Core Contributors
  • 4 Independent signers
  • 1 Community member

The TreasuryDAO multisig is a key target for governance attacks, therefore we believe it is vital to keep this multi-sig as diversified as it is now and even to increase it with this additional signer seat.

Election Process

The community seats in both DAOs are to be reallocated. We would like to suggest having an election for both DAOs. A community member can be nominated or nominate themselves. For the ProtocolDAO 2 signer seats will be voted upon, while in the TreasuryDAO 1 signer seat will be made available to vote upon. The 2 members with the highest votes in the ProtocolDAO will become signers for it, while the member with the highest votes in the TreasuryDAO will join the signers there.

Each term will have a specific length after which the community member seats will be reallocated. The other signer seat allocation will be appointed by the core contributors and/or the signers of the DAOs.

The protocol is still evolving and hasn’t reached the final architecture yet. Therefore we feel that both DAOs should be not changed too drastically. Having core contributors in the DAOs is important to ensure that expertise and knowledge of the protocol guide decisions.

Signer Tasks

Being a signer is an active role, it does require some activity and knowledge about mStable and the proposals that are up for execution.

Additional requirements are the following:

  • Availability for signing on a regular basis (ad-hoc signing might be required)
  • Monthly signer calls
  • Prior experience with GnosisSafe multi-sig is helpful
  • Support with additional tasks (if signer chooses to extend participation)

Additionally, for the ProtocolDAO a bit more technical background would definitely help but is not required. For the TreasuryDAO some expertise for responsible treasury management/processes is preferred.

Signer Stipend

As previously outlined, the community signer position will come with responsibilities and duties. Therefore we should discuss a signer stipend to compensate the elected community signers for their time.

In Closing

This is the next step of decentralising the DAOs of mStable further. An early article outlined the goal that mStable is to be “controlled not by a single entity but by a global community of Meta Governors.” With the closer inclusion of the community within the signer group, we believe this is the right direction forward.

Next Steps in the Discussion

  • Should there be any rule that one member of the community cannot occupy both DAOs?
  • How much in terms of the compensation would you deem to be appropriate? Not a full-time endeavour but could require ad-hoc singing, syncing and monthly signer calls.
  • How long should be the term length for the community signers?
  • Keen to hear overall thoughts and suggestions on this process

dimsome & mZeroNine
The official Cat Herders


Great to see this!

Excited for this as the metanaut community grows in discord; it makes sense to give metanauts seats on the two daos.

Looking forward to this being the first election of many - ultimately seeing a world where all seats are elected.

To answer your questions:

  • I think we should have one person per dao, and not allow the same for both
  • 500-1000 USD in MTA per month max
  • 6 month term?
1 Like

I agree with James on one person per DAO, and not the same person.

I would suggest having shorter terms (1-2 months) to start as a trial run, and if things go smoothly then we could extend them.

Would there be any downside to losing the industry pros on the multisig? I would think they add legitimacy to the project, though I agree they may not be as personally invested in the protocol’s success. Could a community member be appended so that it becomes 5/9 rather than 4/8 or is that a technical limitation?

Thank you both for your feedback!

@james.simpson Ok one person from the community per DAO makes a lot of sense. Should we also limit that one can run only for one spot?

500-1000 USD in MTA is very sensible, should start with somewhere in the middle and then also make it dependent on additional contributions in the DAO.

I think 1-2 months is too short. I see no risk in this. 6 months is probably reasonable, and if it works out well, might increase to 9 months to match the length of a season :smiley:

I don’t think so, so far those two signers have been passive in the ProtocolDAO. I think a community member that is actively involved would add more value. There is no technical limitation. Could do it, but I think we are better of having active members in the ProtocolDAO.

1 Like
  • I think people can run for both, but we just limit their acceptance to one per DAO
  • Sounds good re compensation. This level of comp in my view means the signer is available readily to sign and contributes to DAO discussions and governance in mStable consistently. We could probably calc an approx hourly commitment they should be putting towards this given comp.
  • I would say a 6 month term with a 2 month trial where other signers can vote to have a revote if the signer isn’t performing
  • Agree that the others have been to passive and adding community is stronger for us as a DAO

My position too, nothing to add. Looking forward to diversifying our signer structures.