Proposal & Voting Process

System Broadcasts
,
1

:ballot_box_with_ballot: How Proposals and Voting Work in the Harmony Community

Community governance should be simple, transparent, and accessible. That’s why we have a lightweight proposal and voting process for shaping Harmony’s evolution—together.

To keep things manageable as we grow, proposals are grouped into two categories: Regular and Urgent. Each follows its own clear timeline.

:blue_circle: Regular Proposals

Regular proposals follow a monthly rhythm. They can be submitted, discussed, and refined throughout the current month. Voting takes place during the following month.

This two-stage process gives everyone plenty of time to participate, even if they’re away for a few weeks. It also lets us batch proposals together, so we can share monthly updates, send newsletters, and build buzz around the upcoming vote.

  • Month 1: Discussion and refinement of batch of proposals A.
  • Month 2: Voting by eligible members on batch of proposals A + Discussion and refinement of batch of proposals B.
  • Month 3: Voting by eligible members on batch of proposals B + Discussion and refinement of batch of proposals C.
  • Month 4: Voting by eligible members on batch of proposals C + Discussion and refinement of batch of proposals D.
  • Month 5: Etc…

A proposal submitted in the 1st half of a month will by default move to the voting folder (The Conclave) in the following month. A proposal submitted in the 2nd half of a month will by default stay in the proposals folder (Specs Lab) for an additional month. This ensures we all have plenty of time (2-6 weeks) to discuss each proposal.

:red_circle: Urgent Proposals

Urgent proposals are the exception. They are designed for time-sensitive decisions that can’t wait for the next monthly cycle.

  • The person submitting the proposal decides whether it is Regular or Urgent.
  • If marked Urgent, the proposal must include a short explanation of why it qualifies.
  • Any admin can switch a proposal from Urgent to Regular and vice versa.
  • The discussion and voting timeline for urgent proposals is shorter and defined on a case-by-case basis (typically 7–14 days).

Urgent proposals are reviewed with extra care and should only be used when timing is critical.

Note: We will later decide what exactly counts as urgent.

:hammer_and_wrench: How Proposals Move Through the System

Every proposal goes through a set of clear stages:

  1. Draft – The proposal is created by a Cleared Agent in the Specs Lab (version:review). At this stage, it can be freely edited, commented on, or even deleted.
  2. Ready – Once the author decides the proposal is complete, they change its status to version:ready. This signals it is finalized and awaiting a vote.
  3. Vote – At the beginning of the next voting period, all proposals marked as Ready are moved to the voting stage in The Conclave.
  4. Accepted – Proposals that pass the vote.
  5. Rejected – Proposals that fail to gain enough support.

If a proposal does not have status:ready, it simply carries over to the next cycle. Admins can manually move proposals to the voting stage if needed.

:busts_in_silhouette: Who Can Participate?

  • Submitting Proposals: Only Cleared Agents can submit proposals.
  • Commenting on Proposals: All members can take part in the discussion.
  • Voting on Proposals: Only Cleared Agents can vote during the official voting period.

This setup ensures that while discussion is open to everyone, the final decisions are made by those who support the community.

Note: We will later discuss alternative ways to earn the right of submitting and voting on proposals.

:ballot_box_with_ballot: How Voting Works

Voting is simple and democratic:

  • Every Cleared Agent gets one vote per proposal.
  • A proposal is Accepted if more than 50% of votes are in favor.
  • The minimum number of votes required is one, which keeps the process flexible while the community is small.
  • The voting period lasts for an entire month (for regular proposals) or a shorter window (for urgent ones).

Note: We will later evaluate how to address voter security, privacy, and anonymity.

:police_car_light: Admin Oversight & Veto Power

To prevent abuse (brigading, trolling), admins can temporarily suspend questionable submissions or voting behaviors pending community discussion of appropriate governance processes.

Each admin has individual veto power over any proposal. This power is used rarely but exists as a safeguard for ethical, legal, or operational concerns.

If an admin vetoes a proposal, the action must be made public along with a short explanation. Transparency matters.

Note: We will later decide how someone can become part of the admin crew and how the powers of this crew can be turned democratic rather than autocratic.

:warning: What Types of Proposals Are Allowed?

Only proposals that relate directly to Harmony’s mission, governance, pattern language, or community operations will be considered.

We welcome bold ideas, but they must remain within the scope of our shared purpose. Proposals that fall outside of this scope may be removed or ignored at the discretion of the admins.

As noted in several places, this proposal and voting process needs extensions and improvements. For now, this process is intentionally kept simple to support a small, early-stage community. Instead of presenting everyone from the start with an elaborate autocratically constructed process, we will discuss and evolve all governance issues together.

Got a proposal in mind? Sign up as a Cleared Agent, and then head over to the Specs Lab and join the process.