[Phase 1] HIP-47: Democratic submissions and removals

Disclaimer: I don’t support this proposal. In fact, I think it will accelerate the inevitable decline of a DAO governed democratically. Nevertheless, this is still a democracy and some of you may like this proposal. I won’t be participating further than this. Feel free to take ownership of this HIP and move it forward.

Simple Summary

Only accept requests to Proof of Humanity democratically, excluding Kleros or any arbitrator from the process.


The idea is to first deprecate the arbitrator, currently Kleros, by blocking new registrations and removals. This can be done by making requests astronomically expensive so that no one can pay for it.

Second, design a process through which new registrations and removals are efficiently and periodically submitted using governance. Note that the Kleros Governor will still be needed.

To increase the efficiency of the democratic process, the creation of a Ministry of Registrations & Removals is proposed (more on this later). Members of the Ministry will be responsible for curating and organizing requests before making them subject of democratic vote.


Many members of the POH community have shown discontent with the current arbitrator, Kleros, over a long time. Unfortunately for them, Kleros still remains the best available arbitrator and developing a novel one would take time, money and it would still be highly experimental.

This proposal has the intention of excluding the arbitrator from the registration process in order to start using governance instead, which has a higher positive image among part of the community.


  1. Set submissionBaseDeposit to the maximum possible value, which will be unpayable.
  2. Set the submissionDuration to the maximum possible value, which means that profiles won’t expire and can only be removed by governance.
  3. Define a special type of HIP, called Humanity Request Proposal (HRP), that allows the DAO to submit registrations and removals monthly.

Next, 3. will be precisely defined. 1. and 2. are straight forward.

Every month, a new forum thread will be opened under the title “HRP #Number”. This thread will go through 3 stages during 4 weeks.

  1. Week 1 & 2: People wanting to register must post their video and photo ipfs links following the current policy. A wallet signature must be provided to show that they actually own the address. Removal requests should also be posted during this time following the policy criteria. Additionally, submission and removal requesters must send a small fee of 0.03 ETH to a multisig controlled by the Mission Board. This should be done over the Gnosis Chain to save costs. The 0.03 ETH will be used to pay for the governor’s call network fees (retroactively) and reward members of the Ministry of Registrations & Removals. During this stage, the members of the Ministry of Registrations & Removals should be helpful and assist requesters to correctly present their requests if possible.
  2. Week 3: during this stage, members of the Ministry of Registrations & Removals will curate all the requests. Obviously compliant requests will be put together in the tier A list. Controversial requests will be put in the tier B list. Obviously non-compliant requests will be put together in the tier C list and evidence must be provided.
  3. Week 4: Snapshot voting. In order to not flood the POH Snapshot space, a new, specialized Snapshot space for this purpose must be created.
    1. A binding snapshot poll must be set up to decide whether all tier A submissions and removals are sent to the governor or not. Note that it is very important that members of the Ministry of Registrations & Removals only include in this list high quality requests, as otherwise all the requests may be delayed by a single bad one.
    1. For each request in the tier B list, a separate binding snapshot poll must be set up to decide whether it is included in the governor or not.
    1. Requests in the tier C list are not put up to vote. However, during this week, tier C requesters are allowed to re-post their request with corrections. If they do it successfully, their request should be included in the next HRP without the need of sending new fees. If not, fees are not refunded.
  1. After week 4, submissions and removals must be submitted to the governor. The Mission Board must retroactively refund the fees paid to submit the transactions to the governor and execute them. The remaining ETH collected from fees is distributed among the members of the Ministry of Registrations & Removals. If the list is not submitted to the governor within 2 weeks, the remaining ETH collected from fees is distributed to the requesters.

Ministry of Registrations & Removals

Similar to the Mission Board election, 5 members will be elected democratically to integrate the Ministry of Registrations & Removals. Candidates cannot be Mission Board members. Voters should scrutinize candidates based on their technical and moral aptitudes to determine which submission and removal requests are compliant with the POH policy and mission.

Members of the Ministry of Registrations & Removals are elected yearly with the possibility of reelection.

A member of the Ministry of Registrations & Removals can be displaced by unanimous vote of the Mission Board and simple majority vote of a democratic referendum. If a member is displaced, he/she will be banned for life from political positions at the POH DAO.

Curation process in Proof of Humanity is designed with simplicity and reasonable incentives in place, even curation on removals.

Even for non-technical people, the process that the proposal is suggesting is unrealistic and complicates an already simplified procedure. Also, the proposal’s expressed dissatisfaction with the current arbitrator is unjustified and has shallow understanding of how Kleros arbitration works

1 Like

This is a proposal for people who trust democratic systems and consider Kleros court-staking systems a threat. Let me remind you that Proof of Humanity is still a democracy. What you reckon as “simple and reasonable incentives” or “unjustified dissatisfaction” is irrelevant. What matters is what the democratic consensus is right now about this topic.

Even for non-technical people, the process that the proposal is suggesting is unrealistic and complicates an already simplified procedure.

Wrong. The process is already difficult for non-technical people and in particular the UX was pretty bad at launch (and still is). The system I suggested takes a longer time but it’s easier for the end user if automated.

Hi! Not sure what is the reasoning behind this proposal, as the author is against it.

Maybe it is a thought experiment of a future without Kleros moderation. In which case I think it is a good post of how complex it would be and the hard problems we would face. I think it is great to explore alternatives and I am in favor of an arbitrator agnostic POH, so kudos for taking the time to think and write this proposal.

It could also be to demonstrate through the forum the feelings against/in favor of Klero’s service that the POH community has. Which is good too. Telegram goes very fast and conversations overlap very quickly.

For clarification purposes: I disagree with this proposal but value the time invested in creating it. In my opinion it should not move forward.

1 Like