Proposal Lifecycle

We wanted governance to be deliberate, not impulsive. Every change to the Citrate protocol, treasury allocation, or governance parameter follows a structured proposal lifecycle. This process ensures that proposals are thoroughly discussed, technically reviewed, and democratically decided before implementation. The lifecycle has six stages, each with specific requirements and timelines.

Stage 1: Discussion

All proposals begin as informal discussions in the Citrate governance forum. This stage has no formal requirements -- any community member can start a discussion thread.

The discussion stage serves to:

Gauge community interest before investing effort in a formal proposal
Identify potential concerns, conflicts, or improvements early
Build coalitions of support among stakeholders
Refine the proposal scope and technical approach

A discussion typically runs for 7 to 14 days. There is no minimum duration requirement, but proposals that skip meaningful discussion often fail during the review stage.

Discussion Forum: https://forum.cnidarian.cloud/governance

To signal support during discussion, community members can use the "temperature check" mechanism -- an informal, non-binding poll that indicates directional sentiment:

# Create a temperature check poll
citrate-cli governance temp-check --title "Should we reduce bridge fees from 0.1% to 0.05%?" --options "Yes,No,Need More Info" --duration 7d --rpc https://rpc.cnidarian.cloud --private-key $PRIVATE_KEY

Stage 2: Formal Proposal

Once a discussion reaches sufficient maturity, the author submits a formal on-chain proposal. This requires a minimum deposit of 1,000 SALT (refunded if the proposal reaches quorum, regardless of outcome).

A formal proposal includes:

Title: Clear, descriptive summary (under 100 characters)
Abstract: One-paragraph summary of the proposed change
Motivation: Why this change is needed
Specification: Exact technical details of what changes
Implementation plan: How and when the change will be deployed
Risk assessment: Potential risks and mitigation strategies

# Submit a formal proposal
citrate-cli governance propose --title "Reduce bridge fees from 0.1% to 0.05%" --body-file proposal.md --deposit 1000 --category "parameter-change" --rpc https://rpc.cnidarian.cloud --private-key $PRIVATE_KEY

Proposal categories determine which governance body reviews the proposal and what quorum/threshold requirements apply:

Category	Primary Reviewer	Quorum	Threshold
Parameter change	Technical Council	10%	60%
Treasury spend	General Assembly	Varies by amount	Varies by amount
Protocol upgrade	Technical Council + General Assembly	20%	67%
Constitutional amendment	All bodies	33%	75%
Bridge operations	Council of Oracles	15%	60%
Ethics review	Ethics Board	N/A	Board majority

Stage 3: Review Period

After submission, the proposal enters a mandatory review period during which governance bodies evaluate the proposal.

Technical Council review (for technical proposals):

Council members review the specification for correctness and feasibility
Security implications are assessed
The council publishes a recommendation (support, oppose, or modify)
Duration: 7 days

Ethics Board review (for AI-related proposals):

Board evaluates alignment with the Code of Ethics
Potential bias, fairness, and transparency concerns are assessed
Duration: 7 days, running in parallel with technical review

Community review:

Open comment period for all stakeholders
Duration: concurrent with council reviews

The review stage cannot be shortened. Even if all reviews complete early, the full 7-day window must elapse to ensure adequate community visibility.

Stage 4: Voting

After the review period closes, the proposal enters the voting phase. The voting window is fixed at 7 days for standard proposals and 14 days for constitutional amendments.

# Vote on a proposal
citrate-cli governance vote --proposal-id 42 --vote yes --rpc https://rpc.cnidarian.cloud --private-key $PRIVATE_KEY

# Vote with a specific amount of stake (for quadratic voting proposals)
citrate-cli governance vote --proposal-id 42 --vote yes --stake-amount 5000 --rpc https://rpc.cnidarian.cloud --private-key $PRIVATE_KEY

See the Voting page for detailed mechanics on vote weighting, delegation, and quorum calculation.

Stage 5: Execution

If the proposal passes (meets quorum and approval threshold), it enters the execution stage. The execution method depends on the proposal category:

Parameter changes: Automatically executed by the governance contract after a 48-hour timelock
Treasury spends: Funds released from treasury to specified addresses after the 48-hour timelock
Protocol upgrades: Queued for the next scheduled upgrade window; requires multi-sig confirmation
Constitutional amendments: Recorded on-chain; takes effect at the next epoch boundary

# Check execution status of a passed proposal
citrate-cli governance proposal-status --proposal-id 42 --rpc https://rpc.cnidarian.cloud

# For multi-sig required proposals, sign the execution
citrate-cli governance sign-execution --proposal-id 42 --rpc https://rpc.cnidarian.cloud --private-key $PRIVATE_KEY

The 48-hour timelock provides a final safety window. During this period, the Technical Council can veto the execution if a critical security issue is discovered. A veto requires 6-of-9 council votes and triggers a re-review process.

Stage 6: Post-Mortem

After execution, the proposal enters a 30-day observation period. The original proposer is expected to publish a post-mortem that covers:

Whether the proposal achieved its intended goals
Any unexpected side effects or issues
Metrics comparing before/after the change
Recommendations for follow-up proposals

Post-mortems are not mandatory but are strongly encouraged. Proposers who consistently publish quality post-mortems build governance reputation, which increases the visibility and credibility of their future proposals.