đź“Ś Term 6 Proposal Bulletin

🗳️ Meta-Governance
4

April 2025

Executable Proposals:

  1. [6.7] [Executable] Transfer .ceo TLD to the DNSSEC registrar
    This proposal transfers the .ceo top-level domain back to the DNSSEC registrar to enable standard ENS integration for .ceo domain holders.

    • Vote: Tally
    • Discussion: Open
    • Call Data: View
    • Action: .ceo TLD Control transferred to the DNSSEC registrar, enabling standard ENS integration for .ceo domain holders.
    • Results: Dhive

  2. [6.8] [Executable] Revoke root controller role from legacy ENS multisig
    ​This proposal seeks to revoke the controller role from the legacy ENS multisig on the ENS root contract to prevent outdated keyholders from modifying top-level domains other than .eth, thereby enhancing security and aligning control with the ENS DAO.

    • Vote: Tally
    • Discussion: Open
    • Call Data: View
    • Action: Legacy ENS multisig’s controller permissions have been removed from the ENS root contract, ensuring only the DAO governs non-.eth TLDs going forward.
    • Results: Dhive

  3. [6.9] [Executable] Endowment permissions to karpatkey - Update #5)
    This proposal introduces new permissions for deploying ENS DAO endowment funds into diversified assets—including USDT, real-world assets, and updated LST providers—while aligning with evolving market conditions and updating the Investment Policy Statement accordingly.

    • Vote: Tally
    • Discussion: Open
    • Call Data: View
    • Action: New permissions granted to karpatkey to diversify the ENS endowment.
    • Results: Dhive

Social Proposals:

  1. [6.4] [Social] SP Season 2 Vote Amendement
    This proposal introduces ranked voting for Service Providers, letting voters choose between basic or extended budgets per team. It compares only a team’s own budget options and enforces adjacency in rankings to simplify Copeland-based allocation.

  2. [6.5] [Social] SP Season 2 Vote Amendment II
    This proposal enables voters to rank basic and extended budgets independently across all teams, allowing nuanced prioritization. It treats each budget option as a standalone candidate and aligns more closely with voter intent and UI display.

  3. [6.6.1] [Social] April Funding Request - ENS Meta-Governance Working Group Term 6
    ​This proposal requests funding to support the Meta-Governance Working Group through October 2025, allocating $589,000 USDC and 100,000 $ENS tokens to cover steward and secretary compensation, contract audits, DAO tooling, and governance initiatives—including a new program to reward delegates and delegators.

    • Vote: Snapshot
    • Discussion: Open
    • Action: Approved for inclusion in the collective proposal during a subsequent funding window. View results here.

  4. [6.6.2] [Social] April Funding Request - ENS Public Goods Working Group Term 6
    ​This proposal requests $521,000 USDC to fund the Public Goods Working Group through October 2025, focusing on strategic grants, builder grants, and a discretionary buffer. The discretionary buffer is included to address emergent opportunities like hackathon sponsorships.

    • Vote: Snapshot
    • Discussion: Open
    • Action: Approved for inclusion in the collective proposal during a subsequent funding window. View results here.

Special Note:

Both EP6.4 and EP6.5 aim to improve the voting process for the Service Providers Program by allowing more granular input on budgets. They emerged from extensive delegate and working group discussions following feedback during the April 1 All Hands meeting.

While similar in intent, they differ in how ballot preferences are interpreted, how budget types compete, and the degree of expressiveness allowed. EP6.4 bundles each team’s budget options together, while EP6.5 treats them as separate candidates for finer-grained prioritization.

How the vote will be resolved:

  • If both proposals pass, the one with more votes will take effect.
  • If only one passes, that proposal becomes the official amendment.
  • If neither reaches a passing threshold, the current SPP process remains unchanged.
3 Likes