To participate to the CoW DAO governance it is necessary to hold or a be a delegated to anyone who holds vCOW or COW on Mainnet or Gnosis chains. Since the protocol was recently deployed on Arbitrum and Base, the token was bridged to these chains as well. In that sense, we allow the holders on these chains to also participate on the governance.
Motivation
As possible to see on that Dune Query, a small proportion of the tokens are holder on these chains, however, the holders should still have the same rights as the ones on the other chains.
Specification
Update the snapshot voting strategy to include the erc20-balance-of strategy for holders of COW on Arbitrum and Base. The address of the token on each chain a
We believe this proposal is a great step forward for CoW DAO! Including Arbitrum and Base token holders in governance ensures fairness and inclusivity, which are core principles of our community. Removing barriers like this is critical for improving the decentralization of governance as we continue to grow and evolve.
This is an excellent proposal. I can confirm that there has been growing traction for $COW on the newest networks where CoW Protocol was deployed in 2024. Cumulatively, on Arbitrum and Base, there are now over 8,000 $COW holders who could participate in governance and further enhance the decentralization of COW DAO.
Thank you all for the support and specially @middleway.eth for the instructions, here is the PR. FYI I had to change all strategies to the erc20-balance-of-with-delegation because of the limit of 8 strategies per space.
I am waiting for a review/approve on the PR, after that this update will be ready. @c3rnst mentioned that a small RFP can be created for this. I will send a message on the discord about it
Hey - thanks for following up. Indeed, so generally the problem is that Snapshot PRs are very difficult to review and a simple snapshot change is hard to validate.
In theory, it does not need the core team because anyone could propose this to the DAO, though I am doubtful how useful this is because even a simple change can break a lot. A peer review would be super helpful:
maybe someone who is good with Snapshot PRs can review this: could this be outsourced via a grant, possibly?
I think taking a stab at a RFP might be nice, it could even include wider things regarding snapshot reviews… just an idea.