Thank you, @SilkeNoa.
Yes, I agree that detailed budgets and mechanism for review should be included in proposals at this stage. I understand that implementing a full budgeting system might not be realistic right now, so at first I structured the draft in phases. And your suggestion makes the proposal more practical and ensures transparency and responsible use of funds.
I also propose that this budgeting and audit framework could be activated once certain conditions are met—for example, when the treasury reaches a specific size or when DAO-funded projects start generating consistent revenue.
In the meantime, for any proposal involving spending, the following information should be required:
• Purpose of the spending
for what type of funding it falls under (e.g. grants, development, operations, workstream costs)
• Budget breakdown and total amount
• Implementation plan and use of funds
• Expected returns (for investment proposals)
• Impact evaluation (for public welfare or donations)
Each spending proposal should also include and agree to the following:
Budget Reporting
• For investment-based proposals: submit quarterly reports with spending vs budget, progress on KPIs, and any updates.
• For public welfare/donations: submit proof of fund receipt; a milestone report and impact.
Accountability
• If the report is questioned, the team should respond and provide supporting info.
• If the budget is exceeded, the reasons must be disclosed, and the forum should discuss whether it involves irregular expenditures and whether additional investments are permitted.
In cases of misuse, fake reporting, or missing reports, possible actions include:
• Freezing or reclaiming funds
• Disqualifying the project/responsible person from future budgets
• Remove the responsible person from DAO roles
Also thanks for your input,
@Logan