Proposal Launch and Classification Debate
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-05T02:05:16, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-05T04:34:46)
Dear CKB community, we’ve just posted a proposal for enhancing the Community Fund DAO v1.0 to v1.1
This proposal aims to address current challenges in operational efficiency, project oversight, and user experience by introducing a professional and neutral “Stewards” team and a new Web5 governance platform. Our goal is to empower the existing v1.0 framework, making it more efficient and transparent for everyone.
Appreciate any of your valuable feedback and questions.
Let’s build the future of CKB governance together!
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-05T05:51:01, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-05T05:58:24)
To help the community better understand and discuss the details of the DAO v1.1 Web5 Optimization Proposal, I’ve created a shared space for it in NotebookLM.
You can ask the AI specific questions about any part of the proposal and view an interactive mind map to quickly see the structure and key ideas.
Look forward to hearing your thoughts and engaging in a deeper discussion. https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/e100170d-e89d-4343-b62e-41ce4e301a9f 
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-06T00:09:35, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-06T14:16:03)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
[DIS] Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 优化提案/ Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 Optimization Proposal
Dear CKB community, we’ve just posted a proposal for enhancing the Community Fund DAO v1.0 to v1.1
…
Hello CKB community, we’ve posted a Q&A Update (As of Sept 5, 2025) in our DAO v1.1 proposal thread on Nervos Talk to address key community questions.
This includes a crucial discussion on whether our proposal should be classified as a “Budget Request” or a “Meta-Rule Change.” This is a fundamental governance topic, and we need your wisdom.
Please take a moment to read and share your perspective. Your input will shape the path forward.
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-06T18:13:30, Nervos Nation)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
Hello CKB community, we’ve posted a Q&A Update (As of Sept 5, 2025) in our DAO v1.1 proposal thr…
Hi everyone,
Today’s discussion has been insightful and rigorous, exactly what a healthy DAO needs. To help every member keep up and to focus the conversation, we’d like to post the Ongoing Q&A Update (As of Sept 6) for the core themes that have emerged.
Your perspective is crucial and will directly influence our next steps. We are here to listen.
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-06T21:42:09, Nervos Nation)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
To help the community better understand and discuss the details of the DAO v1.1 Web5 Optimization Proposal, I’ve created a shared space for it in NotebookLM.
You can ask the AI specific questions about any part of the…
To help the Community better understand the nuances involved with switching from v1 to v1.1, I’d like to encourage the Community to try out this NotebookLM complete with both CommunityDAO v1 & v1.1:
https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/557eddf8-442e-4d40-9f80-04e9780ff27f
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-06T21:42:59, Nervos Nation)
BTW feel free to try this prompt:
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-06T21:43:20, Nervos Nation)
Drawing on the provided sources, critically evaluate the v1.1 proposal’s assertion that it is a ‘Budget Request Proposal,’ not a ‘Meta-Rule Change Proposal,’ especially considering DAO v1.0 defines meta-rule changes to include alterations to ‘conditions for adoption’.
Despite v1.1’s claim that it makes no changes to these core ‘conditions for adoption’:
-
Does replacing v1.0’s ‘7 days + 30 likes’ Discussion Stage (which had explicit ‘Passing conditions’ for advancement) with a ‘30-day community review period’ that has ‘no threshold’ for passing constitute a change to a ‘condition for adoption’?
-
Do the new, formalized ‘quick confirmation vote’ and ‘full review vote’ mechanisms for ‘Milestone Oversight,’ complete with specific ‘Minimum Turnout’ and ‘Decision Threshold’ rules, introduce new ‘conditions for adoption’ despite v1.1 framing them as mere ‘execution oversight’ tools?
-
Should this vote be subject of the more stringent rules of meta-rule change?
Matt (2025-09-06T21:45:51, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-07T10:55:25)
I’m all for expediting decision making but unfortunately am compelled to fight blatant misdirection of the rules
Matt (2025-09-06T21:46:23, Nervos Nation)
Somehow in text I feel like it’s easy to talk past each other
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-06T22:14:52, Nervos Nation)
Replying to this message from Matt:
I’m all for expediting decision making but unfortunately am compelled to fight blatant misdirection of the rules
Rules are just as strong as their enforcer
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-06T22:15:14, Nervos Nation)
As someone who received the CommunityDAO funding, v1.1 is positive, that said it also doesn’t solve the problems I encountered with v1
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-06T22:16:42, Nervos Nation)
Whatever our opinion, I’d like to invite the Community to review this proposal
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-07T06:47:44, Nervos Nation)
Hi @mattQuinn @phroi Thank you both for pushing this critical discussion forward.
Our team has a good-faith interpretation based on the v1.0 text, but what matters most is the community’s shared understanding.
To help everyone clarify this, could you please walk us through your textual analysis? For instance, regarding the 3 points you mentioned, how do you connect the v1.1 changes to the specific definition of a meta-rule in the v1.0 document?
Your perspective would be invaluable for the community to build a clear consensus.
Matt (2025-09-07T06:51:53, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-07T10:55:31)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
Hi @mattQuinn @phroi Thank you both for pushing this critical discussion forward.
Our team has a good-faith [interpretation](https://talk.nervos.org/t/dis-community-fund-dao-v1-1-web5-community-fund-dao-v1-1-web5-opt…
As is laid out in the rules, anything that is not a budget proposal is a meta rule change
Matt (2025-09-07T06:52:02, Nervos Nation)
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-07T07:32:50, Nervos Nation)
Replying to this message from Matt:
As is laid out in the rules, anything that is not a budget proposal is a meta rule change
Thank you, Matt, for bringing the focus back to the literal text of v1.0. You are right, the document lays out only two categories.
However, the challenge is that the V1.1 proposal is clearly more than a simple budget request like funding a dApp, because its deliverables are services and tools that directly affect the DAO’s operations. Yet, it is also less than a true meta-rule change, because, as we’ve argued, it does not alter the meta rights of voters (weights, eligibility, core adoption conditions, etc.).
I figure when faced with such ambiguity, we could return to the first principles of what DAO governance is. At its core, DAO governance is the formal exercise of voting power by CKB stakers. From this perspective, a procedure like the “7 days + 30 likes” on Nervos Talk, which is open to non-stakers and does not use weighted voting, is just a valuable community signaling tool. Similarly, the post-approval management of already-allocated funds is an operational execution, not a primary governance decision, etc.
Definitely, our pragmatic reason in classifying this as a Budget Request is not to sidestep rules, but to enable the DAO to evolve faster and more effectively.
I believe we share the same goal. Thanks again for sparking this crucial discussion. We are now keen to hear the broader community’s opinion
Matt (2025-09-07T11:32:06, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-08T02:41:09)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
Thank you, Matt, for bringing the focus back to the literal text of v1.0. You are right, the document lays out only two categories.
However, the challenge is that the V1.1 proposal is clearly more than a simple budge…
You can look back at previous meta rule changes, these did not alter weights of votes, what is listed there are simply examples
Matt (2025-09-07T11:33:54, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-07T11:39:14)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
Thank you, Matt, for bringing the focus back to the literal text of v1.0. You are right, the document lays out only two categories.
However, the challenge is that the V1.1 proposal is clearly more than a simple budge…
Let me put it this way, if it was the Metaforo team proposing these changes, with them proposing to take custody of DAO funds, would you consider it a rule change to the DAO?
Matt (2025-09-07T11:47:45, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-08T02:41:14)
Someone could just as easily propose a CKB/USD calculator and say it should be used so the DAO can pay out in USD instead of CKB
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-10T00:48:39, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-10T01:16:11)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
[DIS] Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 优化提案/ Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 Optimization Proposal
Dear CKB community, we’ve just posted a proposal for enhancing the Community Fund DAO v1.0 to v1.1
…
A Quick Housekeeping Note on “Likes”
Hello everyone, a quick housekeeping note to ensure our proposal proceeds correctly under the v1.0 rules.
Due to the length of the proposal, we had to post the Chinese and English versions in two separate replies (the first and second posts in this thread). However, for the “30 likes” count to be correctly recognized, all support needs to be registered on the very first post.
We have a small request for those who have supported us:
If you have already liked the second post (the English version), could you please also give a ‘like’ to the first post (the Chinese version at the top)?
We understand this means some of you will have liked both posts, but this is the only way to ensure all support is correctly consolidated for the official count. We apologize for any inconvenience caused by the forum’s limitations.
Thank you for your understanding and support!
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-10T06:57:01, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-10T11:04:04)
I would like to also point out that the proposal is now recognized by all parties as needing a meta-rule vote
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-10T06:57:03, Nervos Nation)
(higher requirements for second stage)
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-10T07:02:22, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-10T11:04:18)
I’d like to invite once again the Community to review the Merits of this proposal
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-10T10:41:03, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-10T13:49:41)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
[DIS] Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 优化提案/ Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 Optimization Proposal
Dear CKB community, we’ve just posted a proposal for enhancing the Community Fund DAO v1.0 to v1.1
…
Hi CKB community,
Following the intense and valuable community debate, our proposal’s advisor, Baiyu, has posted a significant statement on Nervos Talk outlining a clear path forward.
- Reclassifying the proposal as a Meta-Rule Change to honor procedural integrity.
- Incorporating the option for USD/USDI denominated funding into the proposal, to address a key community pain point.
- Pledging to extend the community discussion period by one month before any vote, once the proposal meets the initial “7 days + 30 likes” threshold required by v1.0 rules.
This marks a major evolution for the proposal, and our team is now working to revise the text accordingly.
Encourage everyone to read Baiyu’s full statement.
Phroi (No DM) (2025-09-10T20:22:24, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-10T20:25:12)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
Hi CKB community,
Following the intense and valuable community debate, our proposal’s advisor, Baiyu, has posted a significant statement on Nervos Talk outlining a clear path forward.
…
This is so cool!! Just one more vote and we’ll reach 30 
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-11T06:24:04, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-11T10:27:02)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
[DIS] Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 优化提案/ Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 Optimization Proposal
Dear CKB community, we’ve just posted a proposal for enhancing the Community Fund DAO v1.0 to v1.1
…
Major Update on the DAO v1.1 Proposal
After an intense and constructive community debate, the v1.1 proposal has evolved. Based on key feedback, it is now officially a Meta-Rule Change Proposal and includes a USD/USDI funding option.
We believe this new version represents a unified path forward for CKB governance! If the initial 7-day/30-like threshold is met, the discussion period will be extended for one month to build broad consensus before proceeding to the formal vote
Read the full announcement and the current proposal version on Nervos Talk!
舟舟 tovarishch (2025-09-12T07:32:21, Nervos Nation, edited 2025-09-12T11:25:01)
Replying to this message from 舟舟 tovarishch:
[DIS] Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 优化提案/ Community Fund DAO v1.1 Web5 Optimization Proposal
Dear CKB community, we’ve just posted a proposal for enhancing the Community Fund DAO v1.0 to v1.1
…
Thanks to your incredible engagement and 30+ likes, the v1.1 proposal has successfully passed the first stage on Nervos Talk. 
As promised, we are now officially kicking off the one-month extended community review period. To start this new phase, we’ve put together a new video that breaks down the core problem and our solution. It’s the perfect starting point for our deep dive.
Please read the full update, watch the video, and continue asking your tough questions in the thread. Let’s use this month to build a strong consensus together!!