Governance Framework & Process
Proposal System
Amplified's governance employs a structured proposal system designed to ensure thorough consideration of all protocol changes while maintaining efficiency in decision-making.
A. Proposal Types
Each type of proposal serves a specific purpose in the governance process:
Temperature Check (Temp Check)
Purpose: Initial community feedback and interest gauging
Duration: Minimum 5-day discussion period
Benefits:
Low-stakes initial discussion
Early identification of concerns
Community sentiment assessment
Proposal refinement opportunity
Amplified Request for Comment (ARC)
Purpose: Detailed proposal discussion and refinement
Duration: Minimum 5-day review period
Requirements:
Technical specifications
Risk assessments
Supporting data
Impact analysis
Benefits:
Thorough community review
Technical validation
Risk identification
Proposal improvement
Amplified Improvement Proposal (AIP)
Purpose: Final, actionable protocol changes
Components:
Complete technical specifications
Implementation plans
Execution timelines
Risk mitigation strategies
Significance:
Binding governance decisions
Protocol-level changes
Parameter adjustments
Strategy implementations
Emergency Proposals
Purpose: Addressing critical security or operational issues
Characteristics:
Expedited process
Higher approval thresholds
Immediate action capability
Enhanced security requirements
B. Voting Mechanics
1. Off-Chain Voting (Snapshot)
Snapshot voting provides a gas-free way to gauge community sentiment:
Purpose: Initial proposal stages and community polling
Duration: 3-day voting period
Participation: All veLLT holders eligible
Benefits:
No transaction costs
Broad participation
Quick feedback
Flexible polling options
2. On-Chain Voting
Formal governance decisions require on-chain voting:
Security delay: 1-day voting delay after proposal submission
Duration: 3-day voting period
Participation: veLLT holders or their delegates
Weight: Determined by locked token amount and duration
3. Quorum Requirements
Different decisions require varying levels of community participation:
Strategy Rebalancing
Quorum: 2% of total voting power
Approval: Simple majority (>50%)
Rationale: Regular operational decisions
Protocol Updates
Quorum: 5% of total voting power
Approval: Supermajority (≥66%)
Rationale: Significant protocol changes
Protocol Whitelisting
Quorum: 3% of total voting power
Approval: Simple majority (>50%)
Rationale: New integration decisions
General Proposals
Quorum: 1% of total voting power
Approval: Simple majority (>50%)
Rationale: Regular governance matters
C. Implementation Security
1. Timelock System
Protects the protocol through mandatory waiting periods:
Standard Changes
Duration: 2-day timelock
Purpose: Regular protocol updates
Security: Community review period
Cancellation: Possible during timelock
High-Risk Changes
Duration: 5-day timelock
Purpose: Major protocol modifications
Security: Extended review period
Scrutiny: Enhanced community oversight
Emergency Actions
Duration: Variable based on severity
Purpose: Critical issue response
Security: Maintained despite urgency
Oversight: Emergency Council monitoring
2. Execution Process
Ensures secure implementation of approved changes:
Security Review
Audit verification
Risk assessment
Community feedback
Technical validation
Implementation Steps
Timelock initiation
Security confirmations
Execution monitoring
Success verification
D. Economic Sustainability Model
All economic decisions are governed through the proposal system with a focus on:
Revenue Generation
Yield fee collection
Protocol services
Treasury management
Strategic investments
Value Distribution
Protocol maintenance
Development funding
Community incentives
Security measures
Long-term Stability
Reserve building
Risk management
Growth investment
Market adaptation
Last updated
