Governance
HUMAN Protocol Governance is an innovative platform designed for the Protocol ecosystem, allowing members to actively participate in governance by voting on proposals across multiple EVM blockchains.
Architecture
The governance model of HUMAN Protocol is built on a decentralized architecture, utilizing smart contracts for cross-chain communication and governance activities.
Collaborative Model
This collaborative model enhances trust and transparency, allowing participants to verify and validate actions like proposal creation and voting on the blockchain.
Flexibility and Scalability
Designed for adaptability, the governance app framework supports the integration of EVM chains, ensuring scalability. This flexibility is enabled by the Wormhole Automatic Relayer, which makes it easy to add new chains once they fulfil the Wormhole protocol requirements.
DAO Components - Actors in the ecosystem
Magistrate: The exclusive EVM address authorized to create proposals.
Wormhole Guardians: Responsible for authenticating cross-chain messages and facilitating the flow of data across networks, utilizing the Wormhole SDK for actions.
Voters: An EVM address holding governance tokens, who participate in the decision-making process by voting on proposals.
Governance Flow
The governance process begins with proposal identification through unique IDs, accessible via an API. You can participate in voting by depositing tokens. A snapshot is taken at the moment of when a proposal is created, recording the state of token holdings to determine voting power.
Before a proposal can be voted on, you must self-delegate the tokens to ensure their participation in the voting process. The governance architecture uses Hub and Spoke contracts to aggregate votes from various chains, with a magistrate responsible for initiating proposals.
Participation Process
You must connect an account holding the necessary tokens (e.g., HMT) for governance participation.
Getting started
The process involves depositing tokens to signify voting power and self-delegating these tokens to confirm voting authority.
Voting and Proposal Management
Only designated magistrates can initiate new proposals, each receiving a unique ID for identification. Proposals are accessible for review and voting via the user interface and an API for detailed information and status. After casting votes, a request collection phase follows, where the final tally of votes begins. This stage ensures the integration and accurate counting of votes from multiple chains.
Results and Execution
Once voting concludes, the aggregated results are queued, awaiting execution. The execution phase implements the outcomes of the voting process based on the governance actions decided through voting.
Special Considerations
Request Collection and Vote Aggregation
The collection request step initiates the aggregation of votes across different chains. It democratizes the process, allowing any participant to request collection after the voting period, thus reducing centralization risks and promoting greater participation. This step is necessary because messages relayed using Wormhole Relayer, can be scattered otherwise.
Queue, Execution, and Token Management
Once the voting process is complete, proposals move into a queuing stage, where a timelock serves as a delay before initiating the execution of the approved proposals. This delay between proposal approval and execution allows participants to withdraw their tokens regardless of the outcome.
The snapshot mechanism, which records the state of token holdings at the moment of proposal creation, ensures that the integrity and the outcome of the vote remains unaffected by subsequent token transactions, including withdrawals.This ensures a balance between maintaining a stable governance process and providing participants the freedom to reassess their involvement.
Cross-chain Integration and Voting Tokens
HUMAN Protocol leverages the Wormhole Protocol for seamless cross-chain interactions, with each participating chain introducing a unique voting token derivative of HMT. This setup allows for chain-specific governance while ensuring a cohesive, aggregated tally of votes across all chains, reflecting a unified governance decision.
Last updated
