We propose consolidating and re-affirming the governance procedures which were established for the Sentinel blockchain by Proposal 12 (August 2022) and later amended by Proposal 29 (July 2023).

Rationale

We believe this is a good course of action because:

• Both existing proposals are now old and therefore unlikely to be seen by newcomers to the chain.
• Having two separate proposals which codify governance procedure makes it unnecessarily difficult for newcomers to learn it.
• A new vote will provide stakeholders and project contributors who arrived after 2022/23 with an opportunity to view and consent to these rules on their own terms.
• The discussion period for this proposal will give the community, project contributors, and team a chance to suggest modifications or additions to the existing rules, should they feel it necessary.

It should be noted one final time for the sake of clarity that this proposal (in its current, original form) does not change or alter the existing procedures outlined by Proposals 12 and 29---it only re-affirms them in a unified document.

Proposer Rights & Responsibilities

Sentinel is an open source, decentralized blockchain built and maintained by a hardworking core team, many third-party service providers, and countless volunteer contributors from the community. The blockchain's built-in stakeholder governance system is an embodiment of that ethos.

Any individual who has 500,000 P2P for a deposit, possesses the requisite technical knowledge, and follows the procedures outlined herein has the inalienable right to submit a proposal to chain governance for a stakeholder vote. No permission from any individual or entity is required in order to initiate this process, though proposals which (a) do not abide by proper procedure or (b) pose a potential or active threat to Sentinel are liable to be vetoed, resulting in permanent loss of deposit funds.

Pre-Vote Procedure

1.) Common

Per Proposal 12, Common (formerly known as Commonwealth) serves as Sentinel's designated governance forum. All proposal drafts must be posted on Common and undergo a period of public feedback and review (known as a discussion period) before they can be submitted on-chain for voting. Specific rules for discussion periods will be detailed in the next section.

Once the proposal draft has been posted on Common, a link to the thread must be shared on an official public Sentinel social channel (e.g. Telegram, Discord, Reddit) by the proposer within twenty-four hours in order to notify stakeholders, project contributors, and team members of its existence.

The official Sentinel forum on Common is hosted at: https://common.xyz/sentinel

2.) Discussion Periods

Per Proposal 29, Sentinel uses a three-tiered system to determine the length of time a proposal must be available on Common for discussion and feedback before it can be posted on-chain for stakeholder voting. These tiers are defined thusly:

a.) Standard Proposals

Any non-critical (not time-sensitive) proposal which is applicable via text, governance parameters, or allotment of community funds. The vast majority of proposals will fall under this category.

For standard proposals, a discussion period lasting a minimum of seven days must take place on Common prior to submission to the blockchain for voting.

b.) Technical Proposals

Any network upgrade or software implementation, including ones which: (a) require participation from validators OR (b) require participation from dVPN node hosts. This category also includes funding proposals for DEX listings.

Because they're often urgent and rarely controversial, technical proposals may undergo an expedited discussion period of four days before being posted to the blockchain for voting.

c.) Emergency Proposals

A measure which (a) addresses a security threat to the blockchain or network, (b) fixes something broken on the blockchain or network, (c) is time-sensitive, or (d) takes some form of remedial action may be classified as an emergency proposal.

Emergency proposals should NOT undergo any discussion period whatsoever, and should instead proceed immediately to voting as swiftly as possible.

Additional Notes

The proposal category definitions outlined above are not totally concise and remain open to interpretation by anyone submitting a proposal in accordance with their best judgment.

However, if you've drafted a technical or emergency proposal and feel unsure about whether it aligns with the above parameters it is recommended that you consult with the community about the classification prior to submission.

Proposal Submission

Aside from being in English, there is no specific stylistic format required for on-chain proposal titles, descriptions, or metadata. Proposers may fill out these fields with whatever degree of detail or formality they feel is necessary to convey the proposal's intent to voters. A link to the proposal's corresponding Common thread in either the description or metadata field is highly recommended.

As was briefly mentioned above, both on-chain proposals and Common threads must be written in English. If you are uncomfortable or incapable of drafting your proposal in English, using machine or AI-assisted translations from your native language is acceptable.

Voting Procedure

Sentinel's on-chain governance system, like all Cosmos SDK blockchains, allows stakeholders to cast four types of votes, which are defined below:

• YES - "I approve of this proposal."
• NO - "I do not approve of this proposal."
• ABSTAIN - "I have no opinion of this proposal but wish to contribute to quorum, OR I do not believe it would be appropriate for me to participate in this vote due to a conflict of interest or other ethical circumstance."
• NO WITH VETO - "I do not approve of this proposal and (a) do not think the proposer followed proper procedure OR (b) believe it to be spam OR (c) believe it to be a threat to the chain and/or project."