Lower Proposal Threshold to 25K COMP
01Summary
Proposal to reduce Compound's proposal threshold from its current level to 25K COMP, enabling 17 additional community members to propose governance changes. Also updates the GovernorBravoDelegate implementation to set minimum proposal threshold to 1K COMP and grants 5 COMP to Ratan for gas reimbursement.
- Type
- governance change
- Funding
- $5 COMP
Key changes
- Reduce proposal threshold to 25K COMP, lowering barrier to entry for governance participation(high)
- Update GovernorBravoDelegate implementation to version at 0x30065B703DE5d473975A2db5bBB790A23FD6EFbD with minimum setable proposal threshold changed to 1K COMP(medium)
- Grant 5 COMP to Ratan (0xcf0Ef02C51438C821246f2e6ADe50e0F1CB0f385) for gas fees related to contract deployment(low)
Generated by Kvorum
02Description
Lower Proposal Threshold to 25K COMP
Simple Summary
A proposal to reduce Compound's proposal threshold to 25K.
Overview
Governor Bravo enables Compound’s community to change the proposal threshold & over the past several months we’ve seen several key issues that we believe warrant lowering the proposal threshold.
Based off of community feedback, we believe that reducing the proposal threshold to 25K provides an important step in the right direction. This new threshold enables 17 additional EOAs to propose, empowering more community members to participate in governance & programmatically reducing the barrier to entry for delegates.
Full Proposal and Forum Discussion
Technical Details
- Changes the minimum setable proposal threshold in GovernorBravoDelegate to 1K (simplifies lowering the proposal threshold in the future). Updates GovernorBravoDelegate implementation from here to here (identical besides the minimum setable proposal threshold constant).
- Reduces proposal threshold to 25K.
- Grants 5 COMP to Ratan to reimburse gas fees for deploying the new GovernorBravoDelegate contract.
The proposal simulation can be found here.
03Mismatch analysis
The proposal describes three actions: (1) upgrade the GovernorBravoDelegate implementation to a new contract that lowers the minimum setable proposal threshold to 1K, (2) reduce the actual proposal threshold to 25K COMP, and (3) grant 5 COMP to Ratan for gas reimbursement. The decoded calldata contains exactly three actions matching this sequence: a _setImplementation call pointing to the new contract address referenced in the description's Etherscan link, a _setProposalThreshold call with value 25000000000000000000000 (25,000 COMP in 18-decimal units), and a _grantComp call transferring 5000000000000000000 (5 COMP) to a recipient address consistent with the stated gas reimbursement. All values convert correctly to the amounts stated in prose, and there are no extra, missing, or misdirected actions. No unit mismatches or hidden actions were found. Confidence is high because the description is specific and each calldata action maps cleanly to a described action with matching magnitudes and targets a governance-related contract for actions 0 and 1, consistent with the proposal being about GovernorBravo threshold changes.
Generated by Kvorum
04Actions
- Target
- 0xc0da…6529
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- _setImplementation(address)
- Arguments
{ "0": "0x30065B703DE5d473975A2db5bBB790A23FD6EFbD" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0xc0da…6529
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- _setProposalThreshold(uint256)
- Arguments
{ "0": "25000000000000000000000" }- Calldata
- Target
- 0x3d98…cd3b
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- _grantComp(address,uint256)
- Arguments
{ "0": "0xcf0Ef02C51438C821246f2e6ADe50e0F1CB0f385", "1": "5000000000000000000" }- Calldata
05Tally
Summed from votes
06Voters
| Voter | Choice | % of total | Rationale | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EA0xea6c…3bf7 | For | 306K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 9A0x9aa8…ccf1 | For | 256.5K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 880x88fb…3981 | Against | 105K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| A60xa6e8…eef6 | For | 75K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 8D0x8d07…a265 | Against | 70K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 470x47c1…4770 | For | 50K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 7A0x7ae1…e585 | For | 50K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 130x13bd…8548 | For | 50K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| DC0xdc1f…e432 | For | 50K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 070x0703…961b | For | 50K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 2B0x2b38…bf33 | For | 20.1K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 000x0000…3e13 | For | 9.8K | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| D20xd2cb…b9a9 | Against | 860.7 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 840x84e3…5a95 | For | 11.5 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 530x53e2…fdf1 | For | 10.7 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| FC0xfc5a…2263 | For | 2.1 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 730x7302…fa54 | For | 1 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 110x116c…4800 | For | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 7A0x7a67…8c0e | Against | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 0C0x0ce1…2c35 | Against | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 7B0x7b9a…f612 | Against | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 400x402c…fe82 | Against | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 070x0754…76dd | For | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| A30xa342…e2db | For | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 610x61ce…e702 | For | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 1C0x1ccb…c0d0 | For | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 3B0x3b59…22f2 | For | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
| 440x446c…6c26 | For | 0 | 0.00% | — | 5y ago |
07Forum
- Lower Proposal Thresholds v2 ↗discourse · high confidence
Arguments for
- Current delegates holding fewer than 65K COMP cannot create or support Crowd Autonomous Proposals, effectively excluding them from governance participation.— ratankaliani
- Lowering the threshold reduces friction for proposal creation and helps increase token-holder engagement and sense of ownership in governance long-term.— ratankaliani
- A community poll indicated support for lowering the threshold, and the final proposal reflects a weighted average of community votes.— ratankaliani, Dzen
- Lowering the threshold to 50K (or similar) is a reasonable next step given the current threshold only allows 12 addresses to propose.— GFXlabs
- The CAP contract's compStakeAmount limit should also be lowered incrementally (e.g., to 10 COMP) to allow smaller holders to participate, since it is external to the protocol and largely arbitrary.— allthecolors, GFXlabs, ratankaliani
Arguments against
- Lowering the proposal threshold makes it easier to introduce malicious or attack-style proposals, as exemplified by Proposal 84 (the Justin Sun governance attack incident).— rleshner
- Given Compound manages over $10B in assets, proposal creation should be made harder, not easier, especially after the Proposal 62 bug incident.— rleshner
- The existing whitelist mechanism already makes proposal creation sufficiently accessible for proposals with community support, so lowering the token threshold is unnecessary.— rleshner
Unresolved concerns
- What alternative mechanisms could mitigate protocol security risks instead of relying on a COMP-based proposal threshold was raised but not answered.— kleong
- The risk that a lowered threshold could enable more governance attacks similar to Proposal 84 was raised without a clear mitigation proposed.— rleshner
- The implications of allowing anyone to deploy alternative CAP contracts with arbitrarily low thresholds were noted but not fully explored.— ratankaliani, allthecolors
Notable participants
- ratankalianiProposer from Blockchain at Berkeley who initiated the discussion, ran the community poll, and ultimately submitted the proposal to lower the threshold to 25K.
- GFXlabsEarly supporter who endorsed lowering the threshold to 50K and commented on the CAP contract limit.
- allthecolorsSuggested a more gradual, order-of-magnitude reduction to the CAP threshold and engaged in technical discussion about the CAP contract.
- DzenExpressed general enthusiasm and support for the proposal and governance evolution.
- rleshnerCore community voice who raised strong security concerns and announced opposition to the proposal, citing past governance attack risks.
- kleongRaised a follow-up question about alternative security mitigations in response to rleshner's concerns.
Generated by Kvorum
08Similar proposals
- compoundcanceledLower Proposal Threshold to 10K COMP98%
- compoundexecutedLower Proposal Threshold to 65,000 COMP86%
- compoundexecutedCompound Governor Contracts Upgrade72%
- compoundexecutedMigration to Governor Bravo71%
- compoundexecutedAddress Whitelist for Submitting Proposals69%
- compoundcanceledThis proposal will upgrade Compound's GovernorBravoDelegator and GovernorBravoDelegate contracts. We'll use the latest contracts from OpenZeppelin(OZ) library with some modifications to preserve many…69%
- compounddefeatedCompound Governor Bravo Update68%
- compoundexecutedAdd Proposal Guardian to Governor Bravo66%
- compoundexecutedGovernance Analysis Period63%
- compoundexecutedExtend Proposal Guardian Role for the Community Multisig62%