# Screening Committee Transparency Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Governance\ **Created:** [October 23, 2025, 3:53am UTC](https://gov.near.org/t/screening-committee-transparency-thread/41710 "2025-10-23T03:53:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![lane](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/gov.near.org/lane/32/53705_2.png) [@lane](https://gov.near.org/u/lane)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2025, 3:53am UTC](https://gov.near.org/t/screening-committee-transparency-thread/41710/1 "2025-10-23T03:53:13Z")
As a reminder, the [Screening Committee](https://houseofstake.org/docs/structure/screening-committee) (SC) is responsible for reviewing all inbound, draft proposals on House of Stake. New proposals require explicit approval by a member of the SC before public voting can begin. (Note that this will change in the future HoS design.) While the approve action is visible on chain (see links below), at present there’s no way for the SC member who approves a proposal to post their rationale for the approval. This thread is intended to serve as a stopgap mechanism for conveying this information until we have a better, on chain system in place. Whenever a SC member approves a proposal, they should post their rationale along with a link to the proposal in question and to the on chain action. Since delegates also cannot currently share their rationale as part of their on chain voting action, we encourage delegates to also share their voting rationale on this forum. ---
**Author:** ![lane](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/gov.near.org/lane/32/53705_2.png) [@lane](https://gov.near.org/u/lane)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2025, 3:59am UTC](https://gov.near.org/t/screening-committee-transparency-thread/41710/2 "2025-10-23T03:59:44Z")
Three days ago, I approved two proposals, [HSP-002](https://gov.houseofstake.org/proposals/5) and [HSP-003](https://gov.houseofstake.org/proposals/6). On chain approval actions are here: - [Near Transaction AcUQUh9mUqEo4URyFrMPPBEoEsc8MZWh5Cz5iCmWhkEm | NearBlocks](https://nearblocks.io/txns/AcUQUh9mUqEo4URyFrMPPBEoEsc8MZWh5Cz5iCmWhkEm) - [Near Transaction 3NwZLzcHXvGmAsmxJ6ezWacDxfGj4agTvikCVS8fdSXy | NearBlocks](https://nearblocks.io/txns/3NwZLzcHXvGmAsmxJ6ezWacDxfGj4agTvikCVS8fdSXy) In my estimation these proposals are complete, properly formatted, and within the bounds of HoS governance and of the [HoS mandate](https://gov.near.org/t/house-of-stake-mandate/41652). They were submitted correctly and merged on the proposals repository on Github, and were assigned HSP ID numbers. Moreover, economic governance is a clear priority area for HoS, and these proposals are non-binding, “Sensing” proposals, which will give the community and HoS participants an opportunity to try HoS for the first time, and to lock additional NEAR so they can participate in future votes. ---
**Author:** ![lane](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/gov.near.org/lane/32/53705_2.png) [@lane](https://gov.near.org/u/lane)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2025, 3:59am UTC](https://gov.near.org/t/screening-committee-transparency-thread/41710/3 "2025-10-23T03:59:54Z")
---
**Author:** ![lane](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/gov.near.org/lane/32/53705_2.png) [@lane](https://gov.near.org/u/lane)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2025, 6:09am UTC](https://gov.near.org/t/screening-committee-transparency-thread/41710/4 "2025-11-07T06:09:47Z")
I approved the Decision versions of these proposals for voting about a week ago (sorry for the delay in posting here). The on chain approval actions are here: - [Near Transaction AWWwdjmz9nwWYs8J6Z9JdrgryxCskLZPayiwZpabcocw | NearBlocks](https://nearblocks.io/txns/AWWwdjmz9nwWYs8J6Z9JdrgryxCskLZPayiwZpabcocw) - [Near Transaction 6tMmjWxPoRc6bNvSuWuiGaXYeJqPsb9JPU5AvpQQF2sq | NearBlocks](https://nearblocks.io/txns/6tMmjWxPoRc6bNvSuWuiGaXYeJqPsb9JPU5AvpQQF2sq) Not much to add to what I wrote above about these same proposals. There was overwhelming support for them in the Sensing proposals that went live previously. Some folks have suggested that there isn’t enough NEAR locked in HoS yet for Decision voting to begin. But I don’t think that’s a relevant criterion for approving proposals for voting. If others feel this way, they’re welcome to abstain or vote against the live proposals. ---
**Author:** ![lane](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/gov.near.org/lane/32/53705_2.png) [@lane](https://gov.near.org/u/lane)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2025, 6:32am UTC](https://gov.near.org/t/screening-committee-transparency-thread/41710/5 "2025-12-01T06:32:16Z")
I just approved [HSP-006](https://github.com/houseofstake/proposals/blob/c8530d4a823d8a8301d1f69dd0aa7d189939cf8f/HSPs/hsp-006.md) for a [Sensing vote](https://gov.houseofstake.org/proposals/17). The proposal is complete, well-formatted, NEAR aligned, and within the bounds of HoS governance and the HoS mandate. It was submitted correctly and merged on the proposals repository on Github, and it was assigned an HSP ID number.