This is my first forum post here, so have mercy on me.
My name is Joey, and since May 2024, I’ve been leading the development of the re-launched $CLOWN token on ICP. Long story short, we have partnered with various SNS projects to rebuild our reputation within the ecosystem. You can find proposals within ICPSwap, Sneed, OpenChat, and Neutrinite DAOs.
On June 24th, we passed a motion proposal in the Neutrinite DAO to “Add canister iwv6l-6iaaa-aaaal-ajjjq-cai to ICP Coins - ICRC 1”. It has been nearly three weeks since this proposal was adopted, and our token has not been added to their registry. Between June 24th and today, four other Neutrinite DAO proposals have been adopted, yet none of them have been adhered to. This raises several questions:
Are SNS DAOs on the Internet Computer allowed to ignore adopted proposals?
What safeguards are in place to ensure DAO compliance with governance proposals?
Should OpenChat, another SNS, rely on an inactive DAO like Neutrinite to provide token prices in their dapp?
Why doesn’t Neutrinite autonomously add tokens to the ICPCoins website, in a similar way to OpenChat’s “add token to registry” proposal function?
I am deeply concerned with the fact that projects we are publicly claiming as Decentralized and Autonomous are in fact not autonomous. If individual members of Neutrinite DAO manually execute governance proposals, there should be accountability on their end when executed proposals are not honored.
These are just Neutrinite Motion proposals. Are you sure that tokens get added to ICPCoins by way of a Motion proposal followed by some core developer action? OpenChat has a specific proposal topic to add tokens to it’s registry if it passes (example below). Perhaps Neutrinite works the same or similar. If it doesn’t have a specific proposal topic to add a token, then why don’t you make the code change yourself and propose the technical topic that will add the token if it is implemented? The Neutrinite code is open source, so you should have the information you need if you have the skills to modify the code. I guess what I am questioning is why do you expect that the core developer will implement a Motion proposal that you submitted on your timeline instead of their own timeline?
Neutrinite does not have the ability to add tokens to its registry in the same way that OpenChat can. You are right that I would have to code a new proposal topic to autonomously add tokens to the ICPCoins site. What proposal type would this fall under? “Add nervous system function”? “Upgrade SNS controlled canister?”
What I’m hearing is that motion proposals obviously can’t be autonomously executed, as they don’t define actions, however does this mean there is no guarantee that a motion proposal will be honored? If the DAO’s developers and team execute motion proposals on their own time as you mentioned, are motion proposals only performative in nature?
It it is motion proposal, then yes they can refuse because you are asking someone else to do the job for something you want. They have to do nothing. The way to solve this is submitting a proposal that automatically execute what you want upon adoption similar to openchat.
What would incentivize the NTN team to implement the function if it were coded? They could just refuse to implement it. Seems it’s not really a DAO if motion proposals that pass are just performative.
I’m not sure if I would call Motion proposals performative, but they definitely do not change code and do not force anyone to take action. They are essentially polls that are recorded on the blockchain. That makes them only slightly more formal than polls you might start on the forum, Telegram, or Twitter.
I have no idea where the core developer for Neutrinite stands on these particular proposals. I’m not speaking for him. I’m just responding to your questions about autonomous execution and guarantees for implementation.
Motion proposals do not execute any code and there is no implementation guarantee of the content of the Motion. The only way you can guarantee implementation and autonomous execution is if you develop the changes and submit them through the correct SNS proposal topic AND the SNS votes to Adopt that proposal. SNS projects are open source as a condition of launching the SNS.
Also @joeyboey, I scanned briefly through the Neutrinite proposals and didn’t see any proposals to add a token except for Motion proposals. ICPCoins lists many tokens, which makes me think that listing a token on ICPCoins may happen through a different work process than a Neutrinite SNS proposal. I don’t know that work process, but you might want to double check if there is a different mechanism.
Is NTN and ICPcoins still an active project? I’ve had to reach out to the team months ago because there were so many tokens listed at incorrect values. At that time they said they were still active so I dont know if anything has changed.