Ratifying Our Constitutional Documents: Upcoming Proposals Dec 2025

House of Stake Governance
1

Over the past weeks, the community has put remarkable effort into designing our constitutional documents.

Hack Humanity has led the charge with:

  • 2 Endorsed Delegate Workshops focused on defining our Mission–Vision–Values
  • 7 Community Co-Creation Workshops refining our governance frameworks together with the ecosystem

:exploding_head: 370 Feedback Items Processed!

In total, the community contributed an impressive 370 feedback items, every single one reviewed and processed by the document authors. What a strong demonstration of HoS engagement!

A special shout-out to all community contributors, in particular @Othman , @coffee-crusher , @fiatisabubble , @Reza_Rayman , Oration Drr, @Yuen, @Dacha for feedback! And kudos to the Hack Humanity team, including @KlausBrave, @dancunningham, @HumbertoBesso, @juankbell, disruptionjoe, haenko, lillian.w, danrandow, and Momo for driving these workshops and shepherding the documents. (Apparently I can only tag 10 people. The rest of you are VIPs in spirit. Consider yourselves tagged with extra sparkle. :sparkles:)

Together, we’ve built the foundation!
Yet today, none of these charters are ratified — while valuable proposals are waiting in the pipeline.
It’s time to change that.

To govern responsibly, every community member should have clear, accessible information on:

  • Who the delegates and endorsed delegates are, and how voting power is allocated
  • How the Screening Committee works and how it votes
  • How to submit proposals
  • How we enforce transparency and integrity, including Conflict of Interest rules
  • And everything necessary to make decisions that move NEAR toward our North Star:
    Becoming the blockchain for AI, where AI serves people — not platforms.

:high_voltage: Governance Sprint (Now–Dec 19)

We are kicking off the first governance sprint to ratify our core governance documents. These will serve as the official decision-making framework for House of Stake:

:pushpin: Documents to ratify:

(All links tba as soon as proposals are live for feedback on the forum and/or voting)

:key: Key Priority

Our most important goal is to become fully operational, so that any proposal can be submitted and voted on with confidence.

If ratification of these constitutional documents is rejected, proposals cannot proceed or may be deemed illegitimate until we agree on the policy framework first.

That’s why these documents are designed to be:

  • Executable immediately
  • Living policies that can be updated later as we learn and iterate

This is the HoS way: governance that works now, improves continuously, and empowers the community.

:date: What’s Next

:small_orange_diamond: For proposals that have completed the deliberation period on the forum:
We’ll begin submitting sensing and/or decision proposals starting Saturday, Nov 29.
All delegates are invited to review and vote.

:small_orange_diamond: For proposals that are still in the forum deliberation period:
We’ll publish updated versions for final feedback on the forum, leading to decision proposals once the period completes. Note: Such proposals are flagged with HSP-XXX (or HSP-[number]).

:small_orange_diamond: For all proposals:
All documents will proceed to decision proposals, requiring both a majority yes vote from the Screening Committee and a 67% “yes” vote from delegators to pass. Once passed, the documents become enforceable policies and will be published at houseofstake.org as the official reference for the community.

This allows delegates, voters, committee members, the governing body, the HoS and NEAR Foundation to be held accountable to the same standards.

:ballot_box_with_ballot: Call to Action

You’ve all put tons of work into these docs, now let’s get them over the finish line and ratified!

  • Review the upcoming Proposals
  • Lock NEAR and delegate veNEAR
  • Contact your delegate, and make them…
  • VOTE!
13 Likes
House of Stake Updates: Transparency Thread
2

let’s build it together! We need to educate community!

3 Likes
3

We are excited to see those constitutional documents to be ratified soon. Appreciated all the work done by Hack Humanity team and contributors.

We’d like to point out a couple of points to be clarified before moving forward:

Is SC going to vote?

We would like to review those documents before the votes are live.

What do you think about the process of updating them?

Which proposals need sensing and which don’t?

Which proposals are considered in “temperature check”? (To be honest, “sensing” and “temperature check” mean pretty much the same thing. What’s the purpose of “sensing” proposal again?)

Delegates? Also, we are not aware the 2/3 yes rule. Has it been already implemented in the Agora?

Who will enforce those policies?

2 Likes
4

Quick clarification: as things stand today, there’s no majority voting by the screening committee. Any screening committee member can unilaterally approve a proposal for voting. I believe we intend to change this in future.

“Temperature check” is a more informal process that happens here on the forum: post a proposal and entertain feedback. “Sensing proposal” is a more formal mechanism where (following the temperature check period) all delegates can vote on a proposal, but the outcome of the vote is non-binding.

2 Likes
5

Thanks for the thoughtful questions, @Tane.
They highlight exactly why we need clear, ratified documents in place.

To your questions

Is the Screening Committee going to vote?

According to our Constitution draft, the Screening Committee will review proposals, make decisions, and publish the rationale. There is no on-chain vote at this stage. I’m in touch with SC to ensure the reviewal/reporting process runs smoothly for the upcoming proposals.

We would like to review those documents before the votes are live.

100% agreed. I’ll update the post with forum links for review before any vote goes live.

What do you think about the process of updating them?

I’m currently drafting a Q1–Q2 2026 DAO Ops plan and budget, which will define roles, activities, and compensation to support smooth operations.
Think of feedback channels, a role/team responsible to integrate revisions, structured update sprints and ratification votes.
Over the next 12 months, we’ll see what works and refine what doesn’t, and update constitutional documents as we learn.

Which proposals need sensing and which don’t?

There is no universal rule. The key factor is time and maturity of the proposal. If a document has already gone through sufficient rounds of feedback, we can skip a sensing vote and go directly to a decision vote, and for some proposals in this sprint we feel confident to do so.
Also note: every proposal stays on the forum for 7 days for final feedback before voting.

Which proposals are considered in “temperature check”? (To be honest, “sensing” and “temperature check” mean pretty much the same thing. What’s the purpose of “sensing” proposal again?)

Point taken, the terminology needs clarity. That’s precisely why we need these docs.
@Klaus, could you please add a short clarification note on terminology and how it’ll be used in the docs?

Delegates? Also, we are not aware the 2/3 yes rule. Has it been already implemented in the Agora?

The 2/3 rule is defined in the current constitution draft for constitutional votes. I’m confirming with Agora whether there are any technical constraints to applying it in the upcoming votings.

Who will enforce those policies?

In short: we all.

  • Only delegates vote? Code enforces.
  • A proposal lacks details? Flag it!
  • Potential conflict of interest? Report it using the COI policy.

Constitutional documents empower the community to enforce fairness, transparency, and legitimate decision-making. We all share responsibility for applying these rules, and we put them into force by ratifying them.

1 Like
6

Thanks for your clarification. We’d define this period as “Recommended discussion period” or something as it’s an informal process. Temperature checks are generally used for “sensing proposals” at other DAOs utilizing Snapshot.

1 Like
7

Thanks for your quick replies. We will continue to diligently review and vote on proposals with being informed and confident.

According to this and Lane’s clarification, the below text seems confusing.

We interpret this into a rough notion that the ratified constitutions and policies will be in effect until 2026 Q2 (or Q3), while there will be feedback channels and team(s) to revise them if needed.

Who would evaluate the above? Not all the future proposal authors understand the context, history and nuance of how proposals should proceed. How about SC “recommending” if “sensing” proposal is needed or not?

Recommended an alternative in Ratifying Our Constitutional Documents: Upcoming Proposals Dec 2025 - #6 by Tane

Sounds good. The governance related parameters should be visible in the Agora UI as well.
Also, please clarify “delegates” or “delegators” in the text.

We feel this approach would be naive. No one would be the one that stirs up troubles without clear incentives. There has been discussions about ombudsman during the co-creation cycle, which would be suitable to be responsible for “enforcements” of the policies.

3 Likes
8

One more quick clarification: there’s no screening committee “voting” at this stage, as I pointed out above, but screening committee approvals (i.e., approving a draft proposal for voting) are an on chain action. Here’s a recent example: https://nearblocks.io/txns/AWWwdjmz9nwWYs8J6Z9JdrgryxCskLZPayiwZpabcocw and you can view the full list in this thread: Screening Committee Transparency Thread.

We’re not all using these terms the same way. Had a quick conversation with @KlausBrave and @AK_HoG and we agreed to phase out the term “temperature check” since it’s vague, and instead:

We call the Forum Post: Feedback Period (not Temperature Check)
We call the Sensing Proposal: Sensing Proposal (not Temperature Check)

Let’s make sure the docs all reflect this.

L

3 Likes
Co-Created Screening Committee Charter v0.2.0: Discussion and Draft for Community Review
9

Thanks @Tane for your questions!

Let’s me respond point by point:

How the Screening Committee works/on-chain votes of Screening Committee

Thanks, @Lane, for your comments. Screening Committee decisions will be recorded on-chain.

Please also keep an eye out for the upcoming Screening Committee Charter proposal, which will provide more detail on this role.

We interpret this into a rough notion that the ratified constitutions and policies will be in effect until 2026 Q2 (or Q3), while there will be feedback channels and team(s) to revise them if needed.

That’s correct. Expect a proposal outlining roles and responsibilities on this topic after we’ve ratified the constitutional documents.

Who would evaluate the above? Not all the future proposal authors understand the context, history and nuance of how proposals should proceed. How about SC “recommending” if “sensing” proposal is needed or not?

Great point. There will be several review steps before voting, such as feedback on the forum, the HSP Editor review, and the Screening Committee evaluation. At any of these stages, the need for a Sensing Proposal can be discussed.
That said, proposers should be encouraged to engage with the community early to gauge support. See also “shepherding your HSP” proposals/HSPs/hsp-001.md at main · houseofstake/proposals · GitHub
And remember, the Screening Committee does not make the final decision, the delegates do.
In my experience, timing is also important: a Sensing Vote often requires more time, which can be a decisive factor.

Recommended an alternative in Ratifying Our Constitutional Documents: Upcoming Proposals Dec 2025 - #6 by Tane

Thanks for sharing! @KlausBrave , please take note. His team is currently working intensively to find the best solution.

Sounds good. The governance related parameters should be visible in the Agora UI as well.
Also, please clarify “delegates” or “delegators” in the text.

Noted. We’re currently reviewing the smart contract implementation for voting. If implementing a 2/3 threshold requires significant development time, we may need to temporarily fall back to simple majority for ratification to avoid delaying this and future proposals.
I’ll keep everyone updated.

We feel this approach would be naive. No one would be the one that stirs up troubles without clear incentives. There has been discussions about ombudsman during the co-creation cycle, which would be suitable to be responsible for “enforcements” of the policies.

Agreed. Our constitutional documents do include an Ombudsman role, along with reporting channels and other checkpoints in the proposal process to help enforce policies.

That said, I strongly encourage everyone in the House of Stake to take responsibility for our shared culture.
Decentralization comes with decentralized responsibility!
In practice, enforcing policies requires care and attention from many people, not just the Ombudsman.
That said, thanks again for your questions @Tane !

3 Likes
10

Thanks for your clarifications, @AK_HoG. We will review the proposals as they are provided and diligently vote on the proposals with our rationales.

1 Like
11

Quick update on where we are with ratifying our governance documents:

First off , huge thank you to everyone who voted on the Mission, Vision, Values sensing proposal. After the full 7-day sensing period, we landed at almost 81% yes. :tada:
That’s a fantastic signal that the HoS community is aligned behind this document!

Next step: We’ll move the MVV into a decision vote.

Timeline & What’s Coming

We’ll continue with the MVV decision vote and the forum discussions for the remaining policy documents in early January.

Why January?

Well… let’s just say rolling out governance software is basically like any software: We all (me included) confidently nod at timelines… and then the details show up and ruin the party. :ogre:
Our current voting mechanism only supports simple majority voting; for constitutional documents (which require a 67% supermajority) this feature isn’t live yet. The software update and its security audit are still in progress, and we want to make sure everything works exactly as intended before we ask the community to make binding decisions.

Also, it’s the holiday season. Nobody wants a constitutional vote sneaking by while half the community is traveling, offline, or in a sugar cookie coma.

And finally: many of you have shared thoughtful feedback on documents currently under discussion, such as the Code of Conduct and Conflict of Interest policy. Some of these policies depend on each other, and we need to make sure everything is aligned and consistent before presenting the final versions for voting.

Recent forum comments show just how seriously community members take their role in shaping HoS governance. I’m genuinely grateful, it’s clear we have a community that cares, and that’s exactly what makes HoS’ governance model work. Kudos to all of you. :raising_hands:

What we’re preparing next

We’ll come back in early January with:

  • Constitution (feedback period)
  • Mission, Vision, Values (decision vote or feedback period, updated version)
  • Screening Committee Charter (feedback period)
  • Endorsed Delegate Charter (feedback period)
  • Proposal Process (feedback period)
  • Code of Conduct (sensing vote or feedback period)
  • Conflict of Interest Policy (feedback period, updated version)

Thanks for your patience, we’re close, and we’ll get this over the finish line together! :rocket:

8 Likes
HSP-005: House of Stake - Code of Conduct
12

Love this style of communications and updates on the status of everything! I’m looking forward to January (and 2026), since it’s going to be busy, and it will really kick start HoS towards great success!

5 Likes
13

Gm, @AK_HoG and Happy New Year to you and the HoS! :tada:

Do you know if the governance security updates and audit have been completed on Agora, so we can move forward for a decision vote on the MVV? Tks!

1 Like
14

GM @coffee-crusher and everyone. Happy New Year! :tada:

We’ve just shipped the supermajority to production and are now ready to move forward with voting on the constitutional documents.
Huge kudos to @jefag (Agora) and Alex/Sean (Valhalla) for pushing this through over the festive season!

What’s next: We’ll be sharing the first two updated docs, Constitution and Proposal Process, this week to kick off forum discussions for ratification. Atm, we’re aligning with the Screening Committee and Security Council on process and feedback cycles. Stay tuned!

3 Likes
15

Thank you so much for the updates! It’s going to be a busy January, but really exciting for getting the HoS truly live. Tks!

16

Hi everyone, I promised I’d publish the first two constitutional doc drafts by today!
Turns out we won’t quite make that deadline.

Here’s why:
The HoS constitutional docs can’t be written in a vacuum. They need to line up with the House of Stake Foundation’s Memorandum, Articles, Bylaws, and standard legal practice. We spent the past week working through open questions with NF Legal and made good progress, but a few things are still open.

Bianca/NF Legal (who’s been doing a great job supporting this work) is OOO next week, so we’ll pick this back up properly once she’s back. Huge thanks as well to @HumbertoBesso , @juankbell , and the whole Hack Humanity team for pushing the drafts forward (including late-night work).

What’s next:
I’ll use the weekend to figure out how we can keep momentum and move parts of this forward, even without the final drafts published yet. There’s a lot on our plate this year, and while I hate losing time, I’m confident we’re setting this up the right way.

I’ll share an update next week. Thanks for sticking with us and staying engaged!

7 Likes
Key Principles for HoS Constitutional Documents and our Roadmap in 2026
17

Thank you so much, @AK_HoG for the update, and the delays make sense regarding the order of the votes and the drafts.

Could there some other organizational things (that are not dependant upon the docs) such up setting up regular (weekly, bi-monthly or even monthly) gov calls - similar to what you held in late Nov/early Dec, or organizing/cleaning up the Forum categories?

2 Likes
18

Thanks for the ping - and yes, both makes a lot of sense.
We’ll run community calls in January to discuss the Constitutional Docs.

GM HoS - Key Principles for HoS Constitutional Documents and our Roadmap 2026
on Thursday, Jan 15, 2026
at 7pm UTC

Read more here: Key Principles for HoS Constitutional Documents and our Roadmap in 2026

See you there!

2 Likes