Metagovernance/Financial Proposal: A Git-Versioned AN DAO Charter

Proposal summary:

Change the file format of the AN DAO Charter from .docx to .tex to version it with git and release it on and IPFS via a GitHub workflow.

Previous work on the proposal area:


Proposal description:

I propose to change the source file format of the AN DAO Charter, currently formatted as a .docx, into (several) .tex files.

These LaTeX source files can then be versioned and managed in a git repository on the Aragon GitHub as well as locally.
Compiling them with LaTeX results in a .pdf file similar to that being currently in use.

A GitHub action then creates the .pdf file from the source files and publishes it automatically to IPFS.

This workflow is common for documents such as

I already did most of the typesetting, which can be found here:

:warning: The current version is a work in progress. :warning:
I am finishing the charter in the next couple of days before the vote.
The final version will be identical content-wise. However, I will need your help to double-check this.

If the proposal will be successful, the Tech Committee can fork the repo into the Aragon GitHub page and set the new IPFS CID reference in the respective smart contract.

Proposal Rationale:

.tex source files have several advantages over .docx binary files:

  • the source files are human-readable and can be opened with any text editor.
    – LaTeX and all related tools are open source in contrast to Word
    – the source files can be split into several files (here the different chapters of the charter)
    – formatting issues frequently occurring in Word/LibreOffice (and also present in the current .docx version) cannot occur with LaTeX.

  • they allow versioning of the charter with git
    – with git versioning, changes are much easier to track (simply use git diff) or use the GitHub frontend
    – this saves time and efforts every time the charter is amended/altered
    – we can easily collect several issues/fixes and put them in a single pull-request
    – the version number and git commit ID can be automatically included into the generated .pdf file (see the first page of the charter)
    – this makes it easier to fork the AN DAO Charter in case other communities want to use them in their own projects

Overall, this proposal aims to make things cleaner, easier to maintain, and more automated, which might increase the adoption of this charter.

Limitations of any benefits mentioned above:

To my best knowledge, no limitations exist to the benefits mentioned above.

Expected duration or delivery date (if applicable):

Next week (November 8).

I invite the community to suggest improvements and check for errors by opening an GitHub issue or writing here in the forum.

Team Information:

Name: Michael Heuer
Github (preferred):
Aragon Forum: mheuer

Skills and previous experience in related or similar work:
I worked professionally with LaTeX in my past academic career, where I did typeset several journal articles and scientific documents. I also have experience with GitHub actions.

Funding Information:

Amount of ANT requested: 150 ANT €560 in ANT
Escrow where funds shall be transferred:

More detailed description of how funds will be handled and used:

Funds go to me and correspond to my normal hourly wage.
The creation of the LaTeX files and typesetting took me +8 hours last weekend so far.
Finishing it up, formatting, working through issues, error checking, some maintenance will likely take up 8 additional hours.


Providing Github can be used to make future edits to the AN DAO Charter, I would be supportive of this proposal.


I like this too.
I like it that you mention the h it took you. So 16h for this in total. What i prefer is saying how much $ you want in ANT this is clearer and also just mention what your h wage is. At the time 1ANT = 5$ so you get 750$ for 16h of work which is 46$ per h. is this a normal wage for this kind of job? Does this job require a high skill level? It would be nice to know how difficult the task is. so like level1 task is easy its like 15$ per h then level2 is medium like 25$ an h and hard like 35$ and very difficult like 45$ per h. I am not a developer and don’t know the wages for this kind of job. I think making the cost of things clearer is important to check if the Amount requested is fair so ANT holders can better understand that.


These are fair questions.

I also want to be transparent about the fact that I recently started working for the Aragon team.
Still, this was my own initiative and I did the work mentioned in my free time during the weekend.

I did this work and most of the proposal draft (including my wage calculation) on Saturday, when the ANT price was at $4.5 (€3.9). Now it is at $4.9, a 10% increase. I agree that it is better to ask for the price in $ or € to avoid fluctuations. I didn’t think about that, and I will change it.

I live in Europe and the average hourly wage as a contracted (not freelance) software developer in my country is ~35€ / h. With 16 h of work, this would give 560€.
This was the basis of my calculation and on Saturday, this was worth about 150 ANT.

For reference:
I previously worked for RaidGuild, a freelancer DAO, and I think no one would have questioned this amount.
It is not uncommon for senior freelance developers (which I am not) to charge >200 € / h because they need to pay more taxes, do acquisition work (e.g., writing proposals like this, discussing requirements with customers etc.)

Regarding the skill level:
You need to have experience with LaTeX and CI/CD to realize this proposal.
The part that requires experience is the

  • choice and configuration of LaTeX packages
  • structuring of the files
  • setup of the interaction between the git repository and LaTeX
  • setup of Tectonic and the GitHub actions
  • testing and bug fixing

All of that is the work of a software developer.

Once you are done with all the prep work, the other part is just a tedious task of transferring all the 30 pages of the charter from the .pdf into LaTeX code without making mistakes and adding all the references/acronyms/definitions.
Because of my experience, the first part was fairly quick for me. The second part took and will still take time.

I provided the link to the repo, so you can get an impression of the work done by looking into the files (see e.g. 0-Acronyms-and-Definitions.tex).
I would argue that two workdays for all these tasks is fairly quick.

I hope this has provided some transparency.

Let me say that I thought for a long time about asking for compensation at all.
I decided to do so because I thought it is right to set a precedent and ask for a fair compensation.
Most people (including me) feel uncomfortable when asking for money.
We should think about how to make this process comfortable for everyone. I am not sure if it is easily possible to define objective salary classes and difficulties, such as easy/medium/hard/very hard.
Salary ranges depend on where you live and difficulties on your experience/background.

I think it’s very good that you asked and these questions are likely to come up frequently.
I hope we can find a way to have the required transparency without creating too much additional work for the proposer.


A git versioned AN DAO Charter is an excellent idea.

Thank you for setting the precedent here. We are developing templates for forum proposals which I also hope will encourage people to take initiative to propose and seek compensation for positive impact within the DAO


the aragon DAO is internation, so i think its better to refer to international wages compared to local wages. Do you think anyone would do a good job for 20$ per h?

I think bounties are nice. the person who makes the proposal gets compensated for writing it based on the effort and skill required 15 easy-45 very difficult$ per h . then if the proposal gets accepted the tech committee sub-dao could be the management team who creates bounties, assign issues and checks the code and pull requests Transparent bottom-up Workflow - #12 by Sonny The

i think this is important and everything which is valuable for aragon and gets implemented should get rewarded.

Is there such a thing as an international wage yet? I don’t think so (see Offshore developers rates in 2020).

There might be people that can and are willing to do this job for $20 / h, but you might have a hard time finding them. I don’t want to stop you from doing so.
The first result on Google for “LaTeX typesetting service” is They charge $120-$170 / h. Also look on their showcase page for hour references.

Moreover, you have to be careful to not disincentivize talent from high-paid countries such as Canada, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, some of which also have higher taxes. Moreover, developers in the crypto sector are especially well-paid. If we have aligned community members capable of doing jobs, we should not try to outsource this labor.

We can continue this discussion in another forum topic or in the discord channel # future-of-hr if you like.

Now, I would love to discuss suggestions, improvements, criticism to the document here.

I would support this based on the value to AN DAO being > ~560EUR that has been requested to do the work.

My ask @mheuer is to add to the proposal how much it might be to then create a Gitbook of the AN Charter. This is long complex document and I don’t think is very flexible for people to dig into the relevant sections when operating within the DAO. A gitbook style doc such as this one from Maker would be more valuable and I’d support an increased budget to realise this too.


1 Like

I am not sure because it is supposed to be a legal document and has certain requirements.
GitBook (which uses Markdown internally) is not made for this kind of elaborate numbering (there are six layers of enumerations in the AN DAO Agreement Chapter) and internal referencing (Acronyms, Glossaries, Definitions etc.).

Moreover, having a single .pdf document in the end is simpler than having a webpage.
The .pdf is very small and easy to upload on IPFS, self-contained, everyone can read and open it—even without an internet connection.
The server creating the webpage with the GitBook might have an issue or an update might render it unreadable. We cannot expect people to run a local GitBook server to run it properly.

However, I think a GitBook page in addition to the .pdf that displays the essential sections relevant to the community in the current state (without the need to manually update it) could still be helpful for the reasons you describe.
We would need to make sure that this does not create confusion, as there should be only one binding document and not two.

One could try to automatically extract the content from the .tex files in the git and convert it somehow into Markdown or a webpage. I haven’t done this before, but extracting the contents from the .tex files should be an easy task. However, I am not sure if it is possible to display the contents in their complexity with GitBook.

Maybe someone wants to test this out and create a follow-up proposal.


Makes sense. I did not understand the additional complexity on this… thanks for sharing and agree it sounds like something for someone else to take up (if interested)


Hey folks, the draft of the new charter looks pretty nice now.

I made some minor modifications in accordance with LaTeX:

  • I moved the Acronyms and Definitions sections to the end of the charter.
  • I added Acronym and Definitions references in the text, where they apply
  • The numbering in the “Violations and Consequences” subsections of the Community Guidelines breaks with the overall numbering rules, so I removed the numbers. However, I can add them manually if this is a problem.

For some fixes I need your opinion. I also opened an issue on GitHub for that.

  • Who is the author of the document? The Aragon Association? I will add this to the .pdf Metadata.
  • The Forum link refers to the Community section of the forum (🔆 Community - Aragon Community Forum) but should rather link to the Aragon Network section (🦅 Aragon Network - Aragon Community Forum). Should I change that?
  • Aragon Network is defined twice (in Key and Additional definitions). The second definition in Additional Definitions can be removed. Should the first definition be altered?
  • In Chapter 7 in Main DAO Settings in Rules/Agreement: Should „AN Charter document“ be replaced by „This Charter document (referenced)“ as for the items below?

Three acronyms could be removed, because they are used only once:

  • personal identifiable information (PII)
  • non-consensual imagery (NCI)
  • child abuse imagery (CAI)

At the moment, they appear in the acronym list, but it looks a bit weird.
Should I remove the need to create the acronyms by removing the parentheses (PII), (NCI), and (CAI) from the text?

The following acronyms/definitions could be added because they are not explained yet

  • Acronym and definition of ERC-20
  • Definition of „Aragon Govern“
  • Definition of „Juror“
  • Definition of„Juror Registry“

What do you think @daniel-ospina?

Please compare the document with the current charter and check for errors!

I will do the same during the next week.
Let me know about problems and fixes I should make by creating a GitHub issue.

The vote for this proposal will start on Wednesday.
The vote for this proposal will start when the Compliance Sub-DAO gives me the okay and the document is finished.

I think “Juror” terminology was changed to “Guardian” after Aragon Court re-brand to Aragon Protocol


Ah, so should we replace “Juror” in The Aragon Network DAO Agreement in item 2.a.v. by “Guardian”?

If a proposal deploys a new Aragon Court Jurors Registry contract and/or
amends Aragon Court to use a new Jurors Registry, then the new Jurors Registry must use ANT as the native juror token.

Should we do this in the next amendment, which will contain several fixes?

Also in the “abbreviation” section (at page 23) there is the acronym “ANJ” (Aragon Network Juror) that perhaps should become “ANG” (Aragon Network Guardian)

:+1:We will collect all these changes and apply them in the next version.

The vote is live at 12:00 today and ends on the 20.11 at 12:00.

I moved the charter to the aragon Github: GitHub - aragon/network-dao-charter

From now on, we should collect all corrections and amendments to the charter here:
Issues · aragon/network-dao-charter · GitHub.

1 Like

The voice vote for this proposal seems to pass in two days (Aragon Voice - the ultimate solution for creating and managing proposals and voting in a decentralized, cost-effective, and secure manner) so that this meta-governance proposal will enter its critical phase:
the execution phase, where the Charter document will be replaced by a new one.

This replacement is critical because we currently do not have a versioning system tracking changes to the Charter, and I as the proposer could try to sneak in changes to the charter with the hope that those will go unnoticed in the 30-page-long document.
This proposal aims to fix this vulnerability by tracking changes and authors in a versioning system
and makes future meta-governance proposals much easier.

Still, the next steps must be communicated transparently, carefully, and coordinated so that this proposal does not need to be vetoed.

Execution of the proposal

Since this proposal involves a code submission (a versioning system hosted on GitHub automatically releasing and publishing the Charter .pdf document on IPFS), the Tech Comittee has 14 days to approve and incorporate my submission (see the AGP Process, paragraph 5.f.iii.2. in the Charter currently in force).

Please note, that the system does not depend on the GitHub infrastructure. Everyone inclined can maintain a local version of the Git, read the source files with text editor, and build the .pdf Charter document using the FOSS XeTeX.

The system is already running on the Aragon GitHub (GitHub - aragon/network-dao-charter: This repository versions the Aragon Network DAO Charter document.), and I presented it to one of the Tech Committe members (Samuel Furter) so far.

From now on, the Charter is versioned according to the the convention:
The Charter currently in force is tagged v1.0.0-alpha (AN DAO Charter).
The version in preparation is tagged v1.0.0-beta (Releases · aragon/network-dao-charter · GitHub).
The final version for this meta-governance proposal will be tagged v1.0.0.

Within the 14 days, the Tech Committee will schedule the execution of the replacement of v1.0.0-alpha with v1.0.0 in Govern.

In the five days of execution delay, the compliance DAO must ensure, that Charter v1.0.0 neither violates v1.0.0-alpha nor conflicts with the intent being expressed in this proposal to not alter the meaning of the Charter.

Request for Review

To prevent a conflict, I would like to ask the @Compliance Sub-DAO members to review (and request) formal changes in v1.0.0-beta before the execution of v1.0.0 is scheduled to make sure the original meaning of v1.0.0-alpha is preserved.

This includes, for example:

  • fixes to numbering issues (that are incompatible with the strict typesetting in LaTeX)
  • the makeover of the title page
  • formatting
  • usage of acronyms
  • addition of missing Main DAO and Sub-DAO Parameters.

A relevant open issue is the duplicate of the definition of the term “Aragon Network” (which is present in the key and additional definitions) and the numbering issue raised by.

1 Like