Temperature Check

DAOs use Temperature Checks to assess support for major protocol changes before committing engineering resources. This prevents wasted effort on proposals with little chance of passing.

• Example: A proposal to increase the block gas limit on a Layer 2 network. A Temperature Check measures if the trade-off between throughput and hardware requirements is acceptable to node operators and users.
• Example: Gauging sentiment for adopting a new virtual machine (e.g., moving to the SVM or MoveVM) to understand developer interest and potential ecosystem impact.

Before a formal vote to disburse funds, a Temperature Check validates that a funding request aligns with the DAO's strategic goals and has community backing.

• Example: A grant proposal from a developer team requesting 50,000 USDC to build a new front-end interface. The check confirms the need and budget are reasonable.
• Example: Deciding between several investment strategies for the treasury's stablecoin reserves (e.g., lending on Aave vs. providing liquidity on Uniswap v3).

Fine-tuning system parameters often requires community consensus. Temperature Checks provide a low-risk forum for discussing numerical changes.

• Example: Adjusting the staking reward rate or inflation schedule in a proof-of-stake network.
• Example: Proposing a change to a protocol fee percentage (e.g., from 0.05% to 0.10%) on a decentralized exchange to increase treasury revenue.

Used for high-level, non-technical decisions about the DAO's future focus areas and organizational structure.

• Example: Should the DAO prioritize expansion into the Real-World Assets (RWA) sector or double down on DeFi primitives?
• Example: Gauging support for creating and funding a new security working group to oversee smart contract audits and bug bounties.

For decisions that are more about community values than technical mechanics, a Temperature Check acts as a barometer to avoid deeply divisive on-chain votes.

• Example: A DAO considering a significant donation to a public goods funding organization or a political cause.
• Example: Responding to an exploit or hack—should the DAO pursue a white-hat negotiation, a governance attack to recover funds, or accept the loss?

The primary purpose is to gauge community sentiment and gather feedback before committing resources to a formal vote. It acts as a pre-vote filter to determine if a proposal has sufficient support to proceed. This process helps avoid the cost and time of a formal on-chain vote for unpopular or poorly defined ideas. It is a key tool for iterative proposal development.

The process usually follows these steps:

• A proposal draft is posted on a forum (e.g., Discourse, Commonwealth).
• The community discusses the proposal, asking questions and suggesting amendments.
• A temperature check poll is created, often using tools like Snapshot, which uses off-chain signatures for gas-free voting.
• Voters signal their sentiment (e.g., For, Against, Abstain).
• Based on the results and discussion, the proposal may be revised, advanced to a formal vote, or abandoned.

Temperature checks are defined by several non-binding attributes:

• Off-Chain Execution: Typically conducted on platforms like Snapshot or Discourse to avoid gas fees.
• Non-Binding Result: The outcome does not automatically execute any on-chain action; it is advisory.
• Flexible Parameters: Quorum and approval thresholds are often lower than for formal votes.
• Focus on Discussion: The goal is to refine the proposal text and build consensus, not just to tally votes.

DAOs use specialized platforms to conduct these checks efficiently:

• Snapshot: The dominant platform for off-chain, gas-free signaling votes using wallet signatures.
• Discourse / Forums: Used for the initial proposal posting and threaded discussion (e.g., Ethereum Magicians, Arbitrum Forum).
• Commonwealth: An all-in-one platform combining discussion and voting tools.
• Discord / Telegram: Often used for real-time, informal community discussion alongside formal platforms.

Implementing temperature checks improves governance by:

• Reducing Governance Fatigue: Prevents overwhelming voters with numerous formal, costly on-chain votes.
• Improving Proposal Quality: Allows for public scrutiny and iteration, leading to more polished final proposals.
• Saving Resources: Avoids spending gas and time on proposals destined to fail.
• Measuring Sentiment: Provides a clear, quantifiable signal of community support beyond forum commentary.

While useful, temperature checks have inherent limitations:

• Low Accountability: As off-chain signals are not binding, voter participation may not reflect final on-chain behavior.
• Sybil Attack Vulnerability: Off-chain platforms can be more susceptible to manipulation by actors creating multiple identities, though many use strategies like token-weighted voting or proof-of-personhood.
• Potential for Bikeshedding: Discussions can become derailed by minor details, delaying the core decision-making process.
• Ambiguous Outcomes: A clear threshold for "passing" a temperature check is not always defined, leaving room for interpretation.