TIP-013: Bootstrap Threshold DAO Guilds


This proposal is intended to bootstrap the Threshold DAO by setting up an initial organizational structure that results in a functioning DAO with more scalable decision making capability and more effective treasury capital deployment capability onchain through a multisig committee system.

It is a synthesis of all the community discussion leading up this point on how to do this. The proposal builds on the current Threshold Marketing Guild proposal and launches the first three Threshold Guild Committees simultaneously.


  • Establish onchain Threshold Guild Committee multisigs for the Treasury Guild, Marketing Guild and Integrations Guild
  • Set the first term for Threshold Guild Committee members to 6 months so we are not locked into a long term system and can iterate on this system where needed
  • Nominate initial committee members based on previous proof of building within Threshold Guilds so far with ensuing Threshold Guild Committee members elected by Token Holders
  • Give each guild committee member a $2.5k per month grant cost averaged in T from the Threshold DAO treasury over the course of the period so they are fairly compensated and aligned with the success of the network
  • Keep team members and NuCypher team members will be on Threshold Guild Committees but will decline guild grants from the Threshold DAO treasury

Why Threshold Guild Committee Multisigs?

Requiring granular proposals to pass through a 10-day Token Holder Governor Bravo vote is not scalable for decision making, not gas efficient and results in unnecessary governance fatigue that will distract valued stakeholder attention away from bigger, prominent proposals.

For example, a Threshold Marketing Guild proposal to create a new educational video should not need to pass a full Token Holder DAO vote. This takes too long and could result in Token Holders collectively spending more in gas than it costs to create the video. If micro decisions and micro capital deployments are repeatedly handled by full Token Holder Governor Bravo based proposals the Threshold DAO will be hamstrung by governance fatigue and not be able to scale effectively.

Creating Threshold Guild Committee multisigs for each established branch of the DAO solves these problems by delegating more granular working group decision making and capital deployment to committee members allowing the Threshold DAO to operate more effectively in a way that ultimately adds more value to the network.

The Threshold Guild system also enables Threshold DAO members to self-select into community subgroups to earn and work together towards a common goals based on interest and expertise. However, leaders and overall direction is needed for each of sub groups which manifests in the form of these onchain committees.

Threshold Guild Overview

The Threshold community already has four working branches that have each individually proven an ability to execute and bring value to the Threshold DAO: the Threshold Council, the Threshold Marketing Guild, the Threshold Integrations Guild and the Threshold Treasury Guild. Each Threshold Guild has different responsibilities:

Threshold Marketing Guild

The Threshold Marketing Guild is responsible for general Threshold marketing across services, growing our network contributors, onboarding new members to the Threshold DAO, educating people about the value of Threshold and more. So far, this has resulted in community lead events such as Twitter Spaces and Discord calls, animated educational videos, asset design, newsletters, blog posts and more. This proposal outlines the expected responsibilities of the Threshold Marketing Guild in more detail.

Treasury Guild

The Threshold Treasury Guild is responsible for effectively managing the Threshold DAO treasury. This has included growing Protocol Owned Liquidity (POL), earning money for the Threshold DAO through POL farming strategies, creating draft Threshold DAO budgets, approving arb opportunities, establishing liquidity incentive direction for T, developing treasury diversification strategies such as a treasury swaps with strategic partners. A full list of previous Treasury Guild meeting notes is on the forum here for more detail on previous activity.

Integrations Guild

The Threshold Integrations Guild is responsible for developing DAO to DAO relationships for Threshold and creating partnerships for the network with a current focus on tBTC v2 opportunities. So far the Integrations Guild has helped generate tBTC v2 listings on mStable and Curve effectively navigating the governance ecosystem on both protocols. This guild has also developed and maintained valuable DAO relationships with other communities such as KeeperDAO . A full list of previous Integrations Guild meeting notes is on the forum here for more detail on previous activity.

Committee Members

This proposal calls for nominations of inaugural Threshold Guild Committee members based on previous proof of building within the community. Nominations for this proposal are outlined below and have been sourced directly from the community from conversations within each guild.

Nominations are intended to kick start the Threshold Guild system onchain and reward early Threshold DAO builders but ultimately we want a more decentralized approach. As such, future Threshold Guild Committee Members will be elected by our Token Holders.

Inaugural Threshold Marketing Guild Committee Members:

This multisig Threshold is set to 6 of 8 and can be changed by the guild committee if needed.

Inaugural Threshold Treasury Guild Committee Members:

This multisig Threshold is set to 6 of 9 and can be changed by the guild committee if needed.

Inaugural Threshold Integrations Guild Committee Members:

This multisig Threshold is set to 3 of 5 and can be changed by the guild committee if needed.

Non-voting council members can be added to committee multisigs (where needed) as a fall back fund recovery mechanism to reduce the risk of a loss of Threshold DAO funds.

Initial Time Frame

This is a new approach for us and we will learn as we do. We need to be flexible and leave room to iterate on the Threshold DAO structure but still want guilds to have enough time to “find their groove”. The time frame for inaugural guild committee members is six months. For example on the iteration, we may end up deciding that subdaos are a better alternative to multisig committees and want to implement them as the next evolution of the DAO structure.

Guild Committee Compensation

All dev team members on inaugural Threshold Guild Committees will decline any grants which means that there is no conflict of interest in me writing the compensation portion of this proposal.

We want to compensate Threshold DAO builders well to retain our current valuable contributors and attract new builders in the future. Based on conversation leading up to this proposal each Threshold Guild Committee Member will spend around 8 hours per week per guild working to build the network.

Inaugural committee members will earn $2.5k cost averaged in T per month. That equals $15k for the course of the six month period or the equivalent rate of $150k per year based on the suggested hour commitment.

In addition, Threshold Marketing Guild committee members can take bounties within the Marketing Guild for more comp if their work exceeds 8 hours (more on this in the Future Budgets section of this proposal).

A note here - there is nothing stopping us from iterating on comp methods in the future. For example, those who put more hours into Threshold may be able to submit a full time employment proposal to Token Holders with more comp. In the future, we likely want to tie comp to target results but this approach is more sophisticated and the DAO needs to walk before it can run.


Hours will not be tracked but there should be some form of initial accountability in the DAO while we work towards a more sophisticated accountability process. For the sake of simplicity and unblocking the DAO on alignment, detailed accountability and rules mechanisms are not included in this proposal. This will likely result in a separate discussion and alignment period. For reference, solid suggestions have been discussed so far such as the creation of a Threshold Rules Committee with @jakelynch and @Nous or a Peoples Guild responsible for creating and managing OKRs across the DAO. Exact mechanics are as previously stated WIP. In my opinion, a Threshold Peoples Guild that sets OKRs, tracks committee member weekly progress and manages payroll is a good way to have onchain accountability in the DAO because this guild can cancel payment streams if commitments are not upheld. However, this is outside of the scope of this proposal.

If this proposal passes each Threshold Guild Committee will work together to create individual Guild OKRs that are transparently shared with the rest of the Threshold DAO (a process that is underway in some shape for most guilds). Threshold Guild Committee members will also be expected to share weekly updates on Discord so that Token Holders can transparently track progress.

As a simple accountability mechanism in the event that an inaugural Threshold Guild committee member ignores responsibilities the Threshold Council can vote to remove them from a guild committee at which point they will be removed from the multisig and lose the remainder of their T grant. This is expected to be an unlikely event.

Further Guild Budgets

Our approach has always been to create an inclusive DAO environment where anyone interested in building with us can onboard and earn for their work. In line with this each guild will have a discretionary budget to fund community proposals and give contributors outside of the committees a chance to participate and earn. This is particularly relevant to the Marketing Guild where the intention from the committee members is to create a proposal process and a job board where community members can take bounties for completing specific marketing-related tasks.

In a previous proposal, the Threshold Marketing Guild requested the need for a $50k discretionary budget in T which is here. That funding request will be separated out into a concurrent snapshot with this proposal for Token Holders to approve or deny from our DAO treasury. However, that funding proposal being executed is reliant on this proposal passing.

Next, if this proposal is enacted and when needed the Threshold Treasury Guild and Threshold Integrations Guild can request discretionary budgets from the DAO treasury based on the previous budget work of @ben and other nominated members of the Treasury Guild.

Future Guilds

These three Threshold Guilds are just the start of the DAO. This proposal sets a precedent for how future guilds can be structured. Future guilds might include a Threshold Peoples / Rules Guild, a Threshold Product Developers Guild (h/t @arj), or a Threshold Mods and Support Guild.


If passed this proposal unblocks the community and results in establishing a functional foundational structure for the Threshold DAO. It is comprehensive but will not solve every problem we face and more problems will inevitably emerge. One example is Treasury Guild frontruns. We will learn and build on this foundation as we go with the introduction of more guilds, more checks and balances and more DAO structure on our continued path towards progressive full decentralization of the network’s governance.


I have a comment that is accounted for within the proposal, but I would like to highlight it. For a multi-sig vote, in the case of the marketing guild committee, it is set at six out of eight. In the case where you have a recusal or somebody is unavailable for a particular decision or transaction, this is a very high threshold of the entirety of a voting body in parliamentary terms. I don’t have the same issue with the other two committees as they have 6/9 and 3/5 which are within a traditional 2/3 upper bound for a deliberative body. However, the proposal states that this can be changed by individual guilds. Personally, I would argue for five of eight, but I do understand the preference for high thresholds initially.


It’s better to set higher at the start with DAO funds at play on each multisig.

If it becomes a challenge operationally or for whatever other reason for the committee it can be lowered. The transaction to lower would require the initial signing threshold.

What do others think? Also @Nous when do you see recusal occurring?

1 Like

Seconding 5-of-8. The Council already had to lower its 7-of-9 to 6-of-9 purely for better liveness / reduced ops overhead.


I think I recusal should be required if a voting member is in any way a beneficiary of a proposal. I think we may have outlined this in our previous proposal.


That makes sense.

We definitely want to dive into more sophisticated rules / accountability mechanics as one of the next steps in the DAO discussion.


Also seconding 5/8 - our initial proposal did address this:

Risk : Conflict of Interest

Mitigation : If a committee member is listed as a contributor on a proposal, they will be required to recuse themselves from the approval process for said proposal.

If one-third or more committee members are listed as contributors on a proposal, then the proposal will be sent to the Threshold Council to undergo the approval process.


I also have one comment regarding accountability. Traditionally, the body which empowers a committee is the one which also has the power to fire a member. With this in mind, I might suggest that if committee creation is being approved by a snapshot vote, that same body is the one empowered to remove a member.


@Will, just wanted to commend you on the work you are doing with the proposals/DAO. Not everyone is going to be happy. Honestly one of the biggest challenges for the DAO will be keeping people’s emotions at bay and working from a logic based mind set.


Yes ser, well said. Thank you for this proposal. It will get us on our feet and towards being one of the best DAOs out there.


I support this proposal. As the marketing guild did, I would like to see a formal proposal put forth by the nominated members and accepted by vote in addition to this general proposal. The reason is so that each guild can establish a precedent of “application → acceptance”. I know this seems redundant, but it should help shape future discourse. Also, we should proactively adopt the ‘TIP-XX’ title for this proposal.


I already have pre-discussed this with @MrsNuBooty and @Will, making it official here. I’ve decided to not apply for a position in the Threshold Marketing Guild.

I expect to not be able to commit to the hours and efforts needed. I’ll still contribute wherever possible, but don’t want to commit to something and don’t live up to it.

Regardless of this I think this is a great proposal with great candidates, and looking forward to continue, building and learning on this together.


@Naxsun thank you for formalizing our private conversation and understanding your own time constraints. I look forward to your continued contributions to the Threshold Marketing Guild in other ways and hope you will consider any future opening on the committee if your circumstances change.

I would like to nominate @Weedzy for the Threshold Marketing Guild Committee. I believe that Weedzy will continue to be a dedicated member of the DAO and be a valuable addition to the TMGC. I have had conversations with key contributors who all expressed their support of this nomination.


I accept the nomination to be on the MG! Thanks for your work creating this thorough proposal Will.


For the record, this proposal was approved unanimously via Snapshot on March 8, 2022, with 4.5M work tokens in support.


1 Like