Governance & proposals

What governance is

Governance is how the rules of the Vetted protocol change over time. Rather than a single Vetted team deciding on rubric thresholds,slashing percentages, or reward pool sizes, those parameters are adjustable through proposals that guild members vote on.

There are two levels of governance: guild-level, which affects a single guild (its rubric, its reward pool size, its admission policy), and protocol-level, which affects all guilds (slashing math, commit windows, global reputation decay rates). Expert voting power applies at both levels, but the thresholds to pass are higher for protocol-level changes.

Proposal types

• Parameter change. Adjust a numeric parameter (slashing threshold, reward multiplier, commit window duration). The most common proposal type and the one most likely to pass on its first vote.
• Rubric change. Add, remove, or reword a rubric criterion. Higher bar to pass because changes affect every in-flight review in the guild.
• Admission policy. Change which applications the guild accepts (e.g. raising the minimum expertise level, adding a new application question).
• Treasury allocation. Propose a spend from the guild treasury — funding a specific project, paying a contributor, donating to an external cause.
• Enforcement action. Propose suspending or removing a guild member after a code-of-conduct or conflict-of-interest complaint.

How vote weight is calculated

Your governance vote isn't weighted one-person-one-vote. The weight formula is derived from your reputation in the guild where the proposal is being voted:

vote_weight = 1 × (1 + min(reputation / 1000, 2.0))

That means a new expert with 0 reputation has a weight of 1.0, while an expert at 2,000+ reputation hits the cap at 3.0. Guild Masters receive an additional 1.5× multiplier, giving them a maximum weight of 4.5. The slope is deliberately linear — one extra unit of reputation always buys the same extra unit of governance weight, up to the reputation multiplier cap of 2.0. This gives long-term participants meaningful voice without making governance a plutocracy.

Creating a proposal

From the sidebar, navigate to Governance → Proposals and click New proposal. The form collects:

• Title. Short, imperative, specific. "Lower severe slash from 25% to 20%" is a good title. "Fix slashing" is not.
• Description. Markdown is supported. Explain the problem, the proposed fix, and the expected effect. Link to supporting data where possible.
• Proposal type from the list above.
• Voting duration — typically 3, 5, or 7 days depending on how much discussion you expect.

Quorum (default 10%) and approval threshold (default 51%) are set by the platform. Submitting a proposal creates an on-chain record and opens the voting window. Once open, the proposal parameters can't be edited — you can only post comments and clarifications.

Voting on a proposal

The Governance page lists every active, past, and upcoming proposal. Clicking into a proposal shows the full description, current vote tally, and a vote form with three options:

• For. Your weight counts toward passing.
• Against. Your weight counts toward rejecting.
• Abstain. Does not count toward quorum or the approval calculation. Use when you want to signal engagement without taking a side.

Votes are recorded on-chain. You can change your vote while the voting window is still open by casting a new vote, which replaces the previous one. Comments are editable until the window closes.

Quorum and approval thresholds

A proposal passes only if both conditions are met at the end of the voting window:

1. Quorum met. At least 3 voters have participated, and the total vote weight of for + against (abstain does not count) exceeds the quorum threshold. This prevents a tiny minority from passing changes when most of the guild is offline.
2. Approval threshold met. The ratio of for / (for + against) is at or above the proposal's approval percent.

If quorum isn't met, the proposal is marked failed for quorum regardless of the vote split, and it can be resubmitted with a lower quorum requirement or a longer voting window.

Governance etiquette

• Don't resubmit a failed proposal unchanged. Address the objections first.
• Flag conflicts of interest up front. If the proposal benefits you, say so in the description.
• Short voting windows for clear changes. Three days for parameter tweaks; longer only when discussion is genuinely needed.

Sample vote weights

Here's how the weight formula plays out at different reputation levels.