[discuss] Increasing max_proposal_period to 260

Mainnet Ops Parameters
1

tl;dr max_proposal_period is 84 epochs, and we want to change that to 260 epochs

Context

We committed to making a PGF proposal for the latest Donor Drop allocations that waits 60 days before the the tokens are distributed, but max_proposal_period is 84 epochs (21 days). We’d like to discuss increasing max_proposal_period to 260–not just for our commitment, but ideally for the betterment of Namada at large.

History

When Knowable proposed the mainnet parameters, we chose 84 epochs (21 days) because that’s the longest we could imagine the community needing for a governance proposal. We hadn’t anticipated that there could be novel ways of using enactment delays to distribute PGF.

The benefit of increasing this parameter is that we could make a commitment up-front, while having more control over proposal execution timing.

Potential issues

  1. someone could make a governance proposal with a very long voting period
    • this seems unlikely–at least until it’s worth 2000 NAM to advertise something using a governance proposal
    • a future solution could be a new max_proposal_voting_period parameter to complement the existing min_proposal_voting_period, and then we could constrain the voting period without constraining the enactment delay
  2. could this create a complication? eg. if a hard fork happened while a proposal is queued to execute @brentstone
2 Likes
2

I don’t see any reason not to.

1 Like
3

I fully support the use of max_proposal_period to be 260

** I dont see any complications to use that even if hardfork happened while there is a hangning proposal . becuase the hard fork should snapshot all info needed to revive that propsal to the same stage ( may be with some workarounk ) plus you still can have the same issue even with current value 84 .

1 Like
4

We support this max_proposal_period to be 260

1 Like
5

@cwgoes @brentstone any concerns?

I’d like to propose to test this on Housefire this week.

6

Fully in support, being an advocate of taking signalling and social props to even longer (in theory, of course) =)

1 Like
7

What about making the price (in NAM) move up/down with the magnitude of the length of proposal? Longer proposals should cost more, to prevent someone playing games. The lower bound can also be capped to prevent issues in the other direction.

1 Like
8

Thanks to everyone for your feedback! We’re preparing a mainnet governance proposal for this parameter change, so any further discussion should happen here:

2 Likes