Simplifying ANV-5: Ensuring the long-term sustainability of the Aragon Network

Everyone thought that ANV-5 would be a quiet vote cycle, keeping in mind that we had ANV-4 not so long ago because of the recent change of schedule.

However, the Aragon Network has received about 20 AGPs in this cycle. That is very exciting, and it’s empowering to see the incredible growth in the amount of proposals lately.

During the past weeks, the Aragon Association has been building professional processes for AGP review and due diligence in order to ensure the quality of AGPs and also advise ANT holders about them.

The AGP process has matured quite a bit, since it’s been going on for more than a year now.

Each new AGP acts as a new piece of legislation for the Aragon Network. As such, every new AGP needs to act in accordance to previous AGPs.

This is really tricky, since for each new AGP we need to fully analyze the consequences of every new piece of legislation and make sure they are all “constitutional”.

The Aragon Network is the only DAO in the world in which you can propose anything, from a Finance track proposal to a Proclamation or a Meta proposal.

This is great, but introduces lots of complexity, since AGPs are written in plain English, which is very subjective. Smart contracts and DAOs, on the other hand, try to reduce that complexity by imposing objective, programmable rules. As the ones building that software, this is the clear showcase of why Aragon is needed. And we need it urgently for our own community to organize.

We now need to figure out better ways to leverage Aragon to more objectively organize. Until that happens the Aragon Association will reject most of the AGPs presented in ANV-5 that need substantial due diligence work.

A week is just not enough time for the Association to make a reasonable assessment of the long-term effects of so many AGPs, especially since we need to ensure their compliance with prior AGPs.

The AGPs that the Association plans to take to the ballot for ANV-5 are:

  • Reduce the judgment powers of AGP editors: It’s a 1-paragraph change of AGP-1
  • Fundraising maintenance: Maintenance work is just continuing on the previous work, nothing new we don’t know about
  • Nullify AGP-43: The Association has previously deeply analyzed the consequences of this one, being its proposer
  • Aragon Mesh sponsorship: Same as with Fundraising maintenance, it’s a known team continuing their work
  • Court Phase 2 subscription subsidy: Very needed and well scoped
  • Official ANJ and Aragon Network DAO addresses: Nothing new for the Association or ANT holders, since this deliverable is part of the original whitepaper

The following AGPs will not make it to ANV-5:

  • A simple Network budget
  • The Aragon Network is not a Game of Thrones
  • Space Decentral Loan
  • Aragon Council
  • Aragon Privacy Policy
  • Aragon Association 2020 budget
  • Remove ANT from Finance track
  • Aragon Association ANT budget
  • Acquisition of ANJ for security purposes
  • Aragon One and Aragon Network for 202x

The Aragon Association will get in touch with the authors of the following AGPs, in order to conduct due diligence. These AGPs won’t make it to ANV-5, but they will still be analyzed for funding using the discretionary powers of the Association, or otherwise postponed to ANV-6:

  • Aragon Black Curve Labs
  • Fund the Mockingbird Incubator & Hub
  • Improved deployment processes and testnet support
  • Apiary activity feeds
  • Conviction voting + template

We believe this is the best thing to do for the Network. The current AGP process is hard to follow even for a team of four full-time people dedicated exclusively to that mission, so imagine what it’s like for ANT holders.

The Aragon Association also commits to focus heavily on enhancing our current governance process, and accelerating efforts towards fully transitioning into a DAO. But to do that, we need to free from previous time-consuming commitments. We intend to work alongside the community to heavily refactor our governance process, and present a proposal in ANV-6.


The Aragon Association team


I agree! I spend a lot of time on Aragon related stuff and I must admit, I feel a little overwhelmed with all the proposals especially being so close to ANV4.

Im not so sure about this. For sure the AA has discretionary powers to push through proposals, but I feel that power should only be used when nessasary. With all due respect to the proposals on the list, I don’t think any are so urgent that they cannot wait untill the next ANV.

I’m super excited for us to move forward with the governance process. I think it’s about time, but we should be mindful of creating precedent.

Just my 2 gwei


I mostly agree, and we will try to not use discretionary powers when possible!

1 Like

I think the plan set forth is less than ideal but an acceptable solution to a unique situation:

  1. We have a 33% shorter time period to do due diligence.
  2. We have a fresh leadership transition in the AA, and it takes time to ramp up procedures.
  3. We are a year in to the first ANT governance experiment and can clearly see so many glaring inadequacies.

I assume there was some “Advice Process” done as these sorts of process breaking decisions are best done after a feed back round from stakeholders.

Whether or not that was the case, I hope that the people behind the proposals that are in the “discretionary powers of the Association” group can accept that the AGP process needs an overhaul and that this is a special circumstance. They would do more good for the Aragon network by continuing to progress on these awesome projects and accepting this compromise to the previously expected process.

Let’s just get the money where it needs to go to make an impact on the network! Improving the bureaucracy can be done in parallel.

I have to disclose I am very very bias as I love all the projects listed in the AA discretionary batch and would lobby for them all to get funding… So my opinion may be colored :smiley:


Thanks Griff!

Unfortunately both the AA and in general people in the ecosystem are just trying to do too much, and we are all stretched too thin. That makes it very hard to focus on things, and focusing on revamping our governance process is too important for it to not receive our total attention.


i hope the improvements to the AGP process will be informed by the many other DAOs that have come before us :smiley:

Dash, Pivx, Horizen, Decred, and countless DAOs on other smart contract platforms like EOS are a little bit outside of our twitter feed, but i’m sure they have a lot of learnings to share. For instance, I like how DASH makes you burn 5 DASH to submit a proposal, I would love to see people have to burn ANT to propose an AGP… It would make the groups submitting proposals do their own due diligence before throwing down… but who knows, maybe there have been some unintended issues with that, it would be good to check in with them to see.

If any research like this is done, I hope it can be contributed to a wiki like :smiley: