Core Responsibilities of a Delegate

Effective DAO participation consists of three primary responsibilities:

• Analyzing and evaluating proposals – Understanding the implications of governance decisions.

• Engaging in discussions and community debates – Providing informed input and fostering meaningful discussions.

• Casting votes and explaining decisions – Ensuring transparency and accountability to delegators.

Each of these requires time, critical thinking, and a commitment to governance integrity.

How to analyze and evaluate proposals

Before voting on a governance proposal, a structured review process ensures informed decision-making.

• Step 1: Read the proposal thoroughly

  • Identify the core objective and problem the proposal seeks to solve.

  • Determine whether it aligns with the DAO’s mission and governance principles.

  • Consider who authored the proposal—is it from a core contributor, community member, or an external entity?

• Step 2: Assess the governance and financial impact

  • Budgetary considerations – Does the proposal involve treasury allocations? If so, does it justify the expenditure?

  • Governance implications – Will this change DAO governance structures or voting mechanisms?

  • Potential trade-offs – What are the risks? Are there unintended consequences?

• Step 3: Research community sentiment and past discussions

  • Check forum discussions, Discord debates, and governance calls to gauge broader perspectives.

  • Identify whether key stakeholders support or oppose the proposal—and why.

• Step 4: Compare to industry benchmarks

  • Have similar DAOs implemented this type of governance change before?

  • If so, what were the outcomes and lessons learned?

• Step 5: Make a decision and justify your vote

  • Clearly outline your rationale in your delegate thread or forum post.

  • Use data and precedent to support your stance.

  • If abstaining, explain why (e.g., lack of information, conflict of interest).

Example of a well-justified vote: "After reviewing Proposal X, I support it because it enhances treasury diversification without introducing unnecessary risk. The proposed allocation model aligns with similar strategies used by DAOs like Aave and Compound, which have successfully implemented treasury management frameworks."

Providing clear reasoning builds trust with delegators and ensures transparency.

Engaging in governance discussions

Active participation in governance discussions is crucial for building credibility and shaping DAO decisions.

Where to engage:

• Governance forums – Providing structured feedback on proposals.

• Community calls and AMAs – Sharing insights in real-time discussions.

• Discord and Telegram – Engaging in informal governance discussions.

• Working groups and committees – If applicable, joining specialized governance teams.

Best practices for discussion engagement:

• Be constructive – Critique proposals with data-backed arguments, not opinions.

• Ask key questions – Challenge unclear assumptions and request further details.

• Stay professional – Maintain a neutral, objective approach in debates.

• Encourage community input – Governance should be inclusive, not dominated by a few voices.

Example of effective discussion contribution: "I see the value in Proposal Y’s objectives, but the implementation details need further refinement. How does the proposal account for long-term sustainability, given the 12-month funding commitment?"

By asking probing but constructive questions, delegates enhance governance quality and promote stronger decision-making.

Voting and providing rationale

Why transparent voting matters Token holders delegate based on trust, and voting without explanation erodes credibility.

How to maintain transparency

• Post voting rationales – Publish explanations on the governance forum or in a dedicated delegate thread.

• Provide quick summaries – Use bullet points to simplify complex governance decisions for delegators.

• Be open to feedback – If delegators raise concerns, address them constructively.

Vote formatting example

Proposal Title: Treasury Diversification Strategy

• Vote: YES

• Rationale:

  • The proposal strengthens treasury diversification by allocating stablecoins, reducing exposure risk.

  • The suggested allocation mirrors best practices seen in DAOs like Uniswap and Lido.

  • No governance risks or centralization concerns were identified.

• Potential risks and mitigations:

  • Market volatility: Can be managed through gradual implementation.

What if you abstain? If a proposal lacks clarity or you have a conflict of interest, state this explicitly: "I am abstaining from Proposal Z due to insufficient data on its long-term impact. I recommend further discussion before proceeding to a vote."

Maintaining vote transparency strengthens delegate credibility and ensures token holders remain informed.

Avoiding governance pitfalls

Even experienced delegates can fall into common governance traps. Here’s how to mitigate them:

• Passive participation – Regularly review proposals and engage in discussions, even if a vote isn’t imminent.

• Blindly following large delegates – Avoid voting solely based on what top delegates are doing—always conduct independent analysis.

• Failure to communicate – Even if you make the right decisions, failing to justify votes or provide updates damages trust.

• Governance fatigue – Prioritize quality over quantity; focus on governance areas where you can add the most value.