✅ [RFC] Q1 Signer Rotation & Offboarding Clause

Summary

This RFC would like to gather feedback regarding signer rotations in both the TreasuryDAO and the ProtocolDAO.

With this rotation, it is also suggested to add a new offboarding clause that allows the multisig to eject a signer from the group without prior governance approval, should the vote be unanimously in favour.

Onboarding a new replacement signer will still have to go through governance as before. This is done to be able to act swiftly in case of unexpected adversary behaviour.

Abstract

One of the current core contributors will be ending their term at the end of this month, and currently has an active signer position in both the ProtocolDAO, as well as the TreasuryDAO.

It is suggested to replace the signer 0x4B37BbC8CAb32aade27Ce8b1bb2A9E614de81E03 in both groups with a different core contributor.

For the ProtocolDAO, it is suggested to onboard 0xb4dB24A77db4A77242F1e7E6Aa346aeCC440f6Df to the group.

For the TreasuryDAO, it is suggested to onboard 0xB27a7bD98421EB9eAEE522335F45A6F5B65C5C8d to the main signer group and also to the Asset Management subDAO, both in which he will act in the capacity of lead signer moving forward.

In order to grant the DAO signer groups additional authority during times of urgency and other adverse events, it is also suggested to allow the group to offboard and eject a signer without further governance approval. This will happen on the internal voting pages for both the TreasuryDAO and ProtocolDAO respectively.

A unanimous (6/7 signatures for the TreasuryDAO and 7/8 signatures for the ProtocolDAO) vote is required on these platforms before a signer can be removed from the group and the usual governance processes will have to be followed as before for electing a new signer.

Motivation

In order to keep the signer group up-to-date, we will occasionally rotate signers in and out, and since 0x4B37BbC8CAb32aade27Ce8b1bb2A9E614de81E03 is ending their term at the end of this month, we will have to find a suitable alternative for both DAOs.

Both candidates have been pre-selected internally based upon activity and trustworthiness, and it is the opinion of the ProtocolDAO and TreasuryDAO that they will serve as a fine replacement.

Pros

  • Further decentralize the DAOs by having 2 individual signers, rather than one signer that has a place in both DAOs
  • TreasuryDAO signer is aligned on the Asset Management subDAO mission, so will streamline the process moving forward

Cons

  • None

Next Steps

It is suggested that the community comment on this RFC in the coming days, and bearing no significant opposition or change in ideation, we would move ahead with this RFC in the coming week and create a formal draft proposal on Github to be used for review.

Meta Governors are encouraged to provide as much feedback as possible until then, so we can create the best possible outcome for mStable and its users.

3 Likes

I am in favour of this proposal.

I am in favour of this proposal and very happy to collaborate with mStable on the protocol development side.

Feel free to verify the address proposed:
Address: 0xb4dB24A77db4A77242F1e7E6Aa346aeCC440f6Df
Hash: 0x1067c59a168e9e14e804cbbf50b10a1a071ca8e7cebe6aea08362135a09dad623fac742bcce1004031ba753c3504715716c0d3f4da02bb4e8c51779d2cc16b2a01
Message: Happy to join to mStable protocol

1 Like

Hey @mZeroNine
Happy to take it from @jwpe as a Treasury DAO signer
Credentials below
{
“address”: “0xB27a7bD98421EB9eAEE522335F45A6F5B65C5C8d”,
“msg”: “Théo, core-contributor at mStable here\nI’m happy to be joining the Treasury DAO as a signer”,
“sig”: “0x65a7a265302f40b579c13cce50c22a1cadfee83fa7a0c0b43a8fedeb006077cd211591bfaae04c71167c6cde695ebb41da67f4f6bba1c3a50c1b0093a9e8dc3700”,
“version”: “2”
}

1 Like

I am in support and I can vouch for both.

@TClochard and @doncesarts have been very valuable contributors since joining the core team and have proven to be trustworthy individuals.

3 Likes

MIght be good to mention the addresses of the Multisigs?

Good point ser, this will be added to the TDP (I guess TDP is the easiest to ratify it with) next week!

1 Like

In favour of this! :handshake: I can vouch for the new signers and thanks for those who are moving on for their service! :smiley:

1 Like

Thanks a lot for the feedback everyone! I’ll go ahead and create a formal proposal for this now! :sunglasses:

1 Like