---
title: "eth-governance"
tags: 
---

note: may be out of date after the merge

- governance are the systems that allow decisions to be made
	- e.g., shareholders vote on proposals for change, elected officials enact legislation that attempts to represent their constituents desires, board of directors have the final say in decision making
- decentralised governance
	- no one person owns or controls ethereum, this makes traditional organizational governance an incompatible solution
- eth governance
	- the process by which protocol changes are made
		- not related to how people and applications use the protocol because eth is permissionless – anyone can participate in on chain activities
	- the governance systems need to ensure that changes to the protocol are secure and widely supported by the community
	- on/off chain
		- on: proposed changes to the protocol are decided by stakeholders (holders of a governance token) and voting happens "on the blockchain" – sometimes changes are already written and are automatically implemented if a vote is successful
		- off: decisions are made through an informal process of social discussion, which , if approved, would be implemented in code
	- eth is off chain – but many things built on eth (e.g., DAOs) use on chain governance
- who is involved (stakeholders)
	- ether holders
	- application users
	- application tooling devs
	- node operators
	- EIP authors – propose changes to the eth protocol
	- miners/validators
	- protocol developers
- EIP – eth improvement protocol
	- anyone can create
- process for change
	- propose a core EIP
	- present EIP to devs
		- rejected/modified/considered for dev
	- EIP is developed
	- EIP included in network upgrade (coordination required)
	- upgrade activated (tested on a testnet first)
- handling diagreements
	- discussion in public forum – hopefully, one side concedes or a medium is reached
	- however can result in a chain split
- fork: when major technical upgrades or changes need to be made to the network
	-  DAO fork
		-  low turnout
		-  many weren't aware
		-  only represented ETH holders, not other participants
	-  some didn't want to fork because it wasn't a fault in the system
	-  community has adopted a policy of non-intervention in the case of contract bugs or lost funds, to retain credible neutrality
	-  

further reading
-   [Notes on Blockchain Governance](https://vitalik.ca/general/2017/12/17/voting.html) - _Vitalik Buterin_
-   [Governance on Ethereum](https://docs.ethhub.io/ethereum-basics/governance/) – _ETHHub_
-   [How does Ethereum Governance work?](https://cryptotesters.com/blog/ethereum-governance) – _Cryptotesters_
-   [How Ethereum governance works](https://medium.com/coinmonks/how-ethereum-governance-works-71856426b63a) – _Micah Zoltu_
-   [What is an Ethereum core developer?](https://hudsonjameson.com/2020-06-22-what-is-an-ethereum-core-developer/) - _Hudson Jameson_
-   [Governance, Part 2: Plutocracy Is Still Bad](https://vitalik.ca/general/2018/03/28/plutocracy.html) - _Vitalik Buterin_
-   [Moving beyond coin voting governance](https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/08/16/voting3.html) - _Vitalik Buterin_