Governance

Governance in Metastate Network is structured to be fully on-chain and community-driven, embodying the principle of decentralized decision-making. The goal is to enable Metastate’s users and token holders to directly shape the policies and future of the network, in a transparent and accountable manner, without relying on off-chain trust. Key aspects of the governance model include:

On-Chain Voting: All major governance decisions are made through on-chain proposals and votes, executed by smart contracts. This ranges from protocol upgrades (e.g. changing a network parameter or adopting a new OP Stack release) to usage of treasury funds, to the election of governance representatives if applicable. By conducting these processes on-chain, Metastate ensures verifiability and immutability of the outcomes - every vote is recorded on the blockchain, and the execution of approved proposals is automatic and cannot be censored or altered. This is a similar governance approach taken by leading DAOs and L1 networks, but Metastate will refine it for a Layer-3 context with potentially many sub-communities. Each proposal will typically go through stages: discussion, formal proposal creation, voting period, and if passed, on-chain execution of the specified actions.
Token Holder Participation: $MET token holders are the core constituency in global Metastate governance. Each $MET token grants its holder voting power (one token usually equals one vote, subject to any governance contract rules). We plan to implement a governance portal (a web dApp integrated in the Metastate App) where proposals can be created and voted on easily by token holders who connect their wallets. For accessibility, Metastate may explore delegated voting (holders can delegate their voting power to a representative or expert) to encourage participation, as well as quadratic voting or other mechanisms to prevent plutocratic control - these details will be decided with community input. The ethos is that anyone with a stake in the network should have a say in its operation; for example, parameters like gas fee distribution between communities, or enabling new features like “plasma mode,” would go through this token governance process.
Scope of Governance: Metastate’s on-chain governance will control a wide array of decisions, including:
- Protocol Upgrades: Because Metastate uses the OP Stack, periodic upgrades will be necessary (for security patches or new features). Governance will approve major version upgrades and any Metastate-specific improvement proposals.
- Economic Parameters: The community will set or adjust parameters such as transaction fee policies (e.g. what percentage of fees go to community treasuries vs global treasury), staking reward rates or validator whitelists, token emission schedules (if any inflation), etc.
- Treasury and Grants: A community treasury funded by network fees and token allocations will be controlled by governance. Token holders can propose and vote on budgets for ecosystem development - for instance, grants to developers building crucial infrastructure or dApps, funding community events or hackathons, or investing in initiatives that grow Metastate’s user base. This mirrors how Optimism’s governance allocates its Optimism Collective funds to public goods, aligning incentives for growth.
- New United Community Onboarding: As a unique Layer-3 for communities, governance might also play a role in approving or recognizing new “united communities” or major community projects that join the network. While Metastate is permissionless at the technical level (anyone can deploy contracts), the community could choose to offer official endorsement or modest funding to promising community initiatives via a governance vote, thus creating a supportive environment for new use cases.
Sub-Community (United Community) Governance: In addition to network-wide governance by $MET holders, Metastate supports each community (united community or project) in running its own governance, potentially with its own tokens or rules. The Metastate App will include a voting system module that any community can use to poll its members, elect leaders, or manage its local treasury. These local governance processes are separate from (but parallel to) the global governance. For example, a gaming community on Metastate might use an NFT-based voting system to decide game development priorities, while a city-based united community uses one-person-one-vote for local initiatives - all using smart contracts provided by Metastate. The outcomes of local votes can trigger on-chain actions limited to that community’s domain (like releasing funds from the community’s contract wallet). Importantly, these communities can enforce their own membership and voting rights using Metastate’s identity system (Metastate ID) to ensure only verified members vote. This layered approach means Metastate is effectively a network of DAOs, each governing itself, with the $MET governance overseeing the base protocol and shared resources.
Governance Security and Integrity: To maintain the integrity of on-chain governance, measures will be in place such as proposal thresholds (a minimum amount of $MET must back a proposal for it to go to vote, preventing spam), quorum requirements (a minimum percentage of total voting power must participate for a vote to be valid), and timelocks on execution (giving the community time to review and respond if a malicious proposal somehow passed). A Guardian or emergency brake (initially the core team, eventually an elected security council) may be instituted to pause the system in case of critical vulnerabilities or governance attacks, similar to safeguards in other DAO frameworks. However, these powers would themselves be subject to strict rules and eventual community control. From day one, all governance-related smart contracts will be open source and subject to audit and public scrutiny to ensure they cannot be abused.
Progressive Decentralization: At launch, it’s expected that the core development team will guide the network with significant influence (e.g. holding a portion of tokens, acting as initial delegates, and managing upgrades). However, the intent is to progressively decentralize governance as the community grows. This means actively encouraging diverse token distribution (through the aforementioned airdrops and incentives), bringing in reputable community members into governance roles, and eventually handing off critical decisions entirely to token holder votes. Our roadmap (below) outlines milestones like the first community-led votes and the dissolving of any privileged core team controls. Metastate’s governance is thus on a path to becoming a self-sustaining digital commonwealth governed wholly by its users - fulfilling the promise of a true layer-3 community network.

PreviousTokenomics NextRoadmap

Last updated 11 days ago

Governance

On-Chain Voting: All major governance decisions are made through on-chain proposals and votes, executed by smart contracts. This ranges from protocol upgrades (e.g. changing a network parameter or adopting a new OP Stack release) to usage of treasury funds, to the election of governance representatives if applicable. By conducting these processes on-chain, Metastate ensures verifiability and immutability of the outcomes - every vote is recorded on the blockchain, and the execution of approved proposals is automatic and cannot be censored or altered. This is a similar governance approach taken by leading DAOs and L1 networks, but Metastate will refine it for a Layer-3 context with potentially many sub-communities. Each proposal will typically go through stages: discussion, formal proposal creation, voting period, and if passed, on-chain execution of the specified actions.
Token Holder Participation: $MET token holders are the core constituency in global Metastate governance. Each $MET token grants its holder voting power (one token usually equals one vote, subject to any governance contract rules). We plan to implement a governance portal (a web dApp integrated in the Metastate App) where proposals can be created and voted on easily by token holders who connect their wallets. For accessibility, Metastate may explore delegated voting (holders can delegate their voting power to a representative or expert) to encourage participation, as well as quadratic voting or other mechanisms to prevent plutocratic control - these details will be decided with community input. The ethos is that anyone with a stake in the network should have a say in its operation; for example, parameters like gas fee distribution between communities, or enabling new features like “plasma mode,” would go through this token governance process.
Scope of Governance: Metastate’s on-chain governance will control a wide array of decisions, including:
- Protocol Upgrades: Because Metastate uses the OP Stack, periodic upgrades will be necessary (for security patches or new features). Governance will approve major version upgrades and any Metastate-specific improvement proposals.
- Economic Parameters: The community will set or adjust parameters such as transaction fee policies (e.g. what percentage of fees go to community treasuries vs global treasury), staking reward rates or validator whitelists, token emission schedules (if any inflation), etc.
- Treasury and Grants: A community treasury funded by network fees and token allocations will be controlled by governance. Token holders can propose and vote on budgets for ecosystem development - for instance, grants to developers building crucial infrastructure or dApps, funding community events or hackathons, or investing in initiatives that grow Metastate’s user base. This mirrors how Optimism’s governance allocates its Optimism Collective funds to public goods, aligning incentives for growth.
- New United Community Onboarding: As a unique Layer-3 for communities, governance might also play a role in approving or recognizing new “united communities” or major community projects that join the network. While Metastate is permissionless at the technical level (anyone can deploy contracts), the community could choose to offer official endorsement or modest funding to promising community initiatives via a governance vote, thus creating a supportive environment for new use cases.
Sub-Community (United Community) Governance: In addition to network-wide governance by $MET holders, Metastate supports each community (united community or project) in running its own governance, potentially with its own tokens or rules. The Metastate App will include a voting system module that any community can use to poll its members, elect leaders, or manage its local treasury. These local governance processes are separate from (but parallel to) the global governance. For example, a gaming community on Metastate might use an NFT-based voting system to decide game development priorities, while a city-based united community uses one-person-one-vote for local initiatives - all using smart contracts provided by Metastate. The outcomes of local votes can trigger on-chain actions limited to that community’s domain (like releasing funds from the community’s contract wallet). Importantly, these communities can enforce their own membership and voting rights using Metastate’s identity system (Metastate ID) to ensure only verified members vote. This layered approach means Metastate is effectively a network of DAOs, each governing itself, with the $MET governance overseeing the base protocol and shared resources.
Governance Security and Integrity: To maintain the integrity of on-chain governance, measures will be in place such as proposal thresholds (a minimum amount of $MET must back a proposal for it to go to vote, preventing spam), quorum requirements (a minimum percentage of total voting power must participate for a vote to be valid), and timelocks on execution (giving the community time to review and respond if a malicious proposal somehow passed). A Guardian or emergency brake (initially the core team, eventually an elected security council) may be instituted to pause the system in case of critical vulnerabilities or governance attacks, similar to safeguards in other DAO frameworks. However, these powers would themselves be subject to strict rules and eventual community control. From day one, all governance-related smart contracts will be open source and subject to audit and public scrutiny to ensure they cannot be abused.
Progressive Decentralization: At launch, it’s expected that the core development team will guide the network with significant influence (e.g. holding a portion of tokens, acting as initial delegates, and managing upgrades). However, the intent is to progressively decentralize governance as the community grows. This means actively encouraging diverse token distribution (through the aforementioned airdrops and incentives), bringing in reputable community members into governance roles, and eventually handing off critical decisions entirely to token holder votes. Our roadmap (below) outlines milestones like the first community-led votes and the dissolving of any privileged core team controls. Metastate’s governance is thus on a path to becoming a self-sustaining digital commonwealth governed wholly by its users - fulfilling the promise of a true layer-3 community network.

PreviousTokenomics NextRoadmap

Last updated 11 days ago