Telcoin

Compliance Council Improvement Proposal (CCIP) Process

Overview

The following section describes the context and procedure encompassed by the Compliance Council Improvement Proposal (CCIP) process. The CCIP process is used by the Compliance Council to (1) veto Miner Council Improvement Proposals (2) develop authorizations and conflict resolution processes (3) and to authorize participants into positions of authority in Telcoin Platform governance

CCIP: Proposal Authors

  • CCIP Forum Channel: Any registered member of the Telcoin forum may submit a CCIP to the CCIP forum channel for review and requests for comments.
  • Compliance Council Snapshot: All Compliance Council members holding a CCNFT, TAO members or other designated authors as determined by the Miner Assembly may submit CCIP proposals to the Compliance Council snapshot for voting.

CCIP: Voters

  • Compliance Council: All Compliance Council members holding a CCNFT may vote on a CCIP veto proposal.

CCIP: Implementation units

  • Compliance Council: Responsible for instructing, coordinating, or administering the implementation of new policies and procedures internally or with third-parties.
  • TAO: At the request of the Compliance Council, enforces rules, maintains and alters existing components, assists with the coordination of third parties to construct new facilities, and documents the outcome of CCIP proposals on Telcoin.org.

Compliance Council

The Compliance Council is a special-purpose governing body that crosses jurisdictions of the Platform’s governance system to ensure proposal compliance with governance rules and laws, authorize new miners, develops legal and organizational entities, monitors and enforces governance rules, and serves a low cost means to conflict resolution.

CCIP: Decision-making Rules and Authority

  • Council | Representation | Process and Domain of Authority | Decision-making Rules
  • Compliance Council | Compliance Council
    · Members: 4
    · Representation: Balanced across all four Miner Groups. | Compliance Improvement Proposal (CCIP)

    Authority
    • Veto authority over all Miner Council proposals
    • Compliance,
    • Legal and Organizational,
    • Conflict Resolution,
    • Actor Authorizations | Proposal Authority: TAO, Compliance Council

    Approval: 3 out of 4
    Quorum: 75%
    Duration: 72 hours
    Channel: telcoincompliancecouncil.eth

CCIP: Authority Rules

The CCIP process may be used by the Compliance Council for the following types of proposals.

  • Veto Proposals: The Compliance Council may veto any Miner Council proposals using the CCIP process at any point during the voting process and up to 72 hours after it has been approved by the relevant Miner Council(s).
    • Example: A CCIP proposal to veto a TELIP proposal that would distribute issuance from the TEL treasury beyond sustainable levels.
  • Authorizations: The Compliance Council may authorize Miners, Council Members, and operational contributors using the CCIP process.
    • Example: A proposal to authorize a new Validator.
  • Authorizations Processes: The Compliance Council may introduce and alter new and existing authorizations processes.
    • Example: A proposal to create a KYC/AML process to verify the identity of new Council Members.
  • Conflict-Resolution Processes: The Compliance Council may develop and refine conflict-resolution processes.
    • Example: A proposal to create a new conflict-resolution process using discord and google forms.

CCIP: Interactions and Outcomes

CCIP: Processes Overview

The CCIP process may be used by the Compliance Council to (1) veto Miner Council improvement proposals, (2) to authorize new participants into positions on the Platform, (3) introduce and improve conflict resolution and authorizations processes. Each proposal type differs in terms of procedural requirements.

CCIP Veto Process

The following process is used by the Compliance Council to veto Miner Council improvement proposals (e.g. a TIP, TELIP, TELxIP, or TANIP).

  1. CCIP Proposal: At any point during the IP process and up to 72 hours after the Miner Council IP is affirmed by the relevant Miner Councils, a Compliance Council or Telcoin Foundation member submits a proposal to veto the Improvement Proposal to the Compliance Council Snapshot.
  2. Compliance Council Vote: The Compliance Council must vote to veto the proposal within 72 hours after it is approved by the relevant Councils, or else the proposal will be approved. The Compliance Council members who vote to veto the proposal, must provide their rationale and feedback at the time of the vote.
    • Approval (Veto) Rate: 3/4
    • Quorum: 75%
    • Duration: 72 hours (3 days)
  3. Implementation: If the proposal is approved, the following actions take place
  4. Social: The relevant Councils either implement the improvement or works with the TAO or other third parties to implement the update.
  5. TEL Transfers: TEL is transferred from the relevant Council Safe to the intended address as a result of the affirmation of the proposal.
  6. Documentation: The Proposal Author from the relevant Council coordinates with the TAO to update Telcoin.org IP documentation.

Veto: Outcomes and Feedback

  • Proposal Affirmed: If the proposal is affirmed without a veto by the Compliance Council, it will be implemented and documented according to the specification outlined in the proposal.
  • Proposal Vetoed: If the proposal is vetoed by the Compliance Council, the dissenting members must provide a rationale as to (1) why it failed to meet their decision-making criteria and (2) constructive feedback to help the relevant council modify the proposal to meet the criteria provided in the rationale.

Veto: Evaluative Criteria

  • Consistency with the Telcoin Association Constitution: Mission, Vision, Values
    • Does this proposal violate the purpose set out in the Telcoin Association constitution mission, vision, and values?
  • Feasibility Criteria: Legal, Political
    • Legal Feasibility: Is a proposed program of action lawful? Is the proposed program within the legal competence of an entrepreneur to undertake on his own authority?
    • Political Feasibility: Can the appropriate decisions be sustained?
  • Participation: General community participation across miner groups in deliberation process
  • Legitimacy: As seen by participants in decision processes
  • Accountability: Councils are held accountable to Miners concerning the policies and rules chosen.
  • Proportional Equivalence: The costs of the system should be less than or equal to the benefits derived from the system.

CCIP Authorizations Procedure

Authorizations Process

The following CCIP process is used by the Compliance Council to authorize new Miners(where applicable), Council Members, and operational contributors.

  1. Forum Proposal: The prospective participant submits an authorization proposal to the respective authorizations channel on the Telcoin Forum.
  2. Compliance Council Proposal: A Compliance Council or Telcoin Foundation member submits the authorizations proposal to the Compliance Council snapshot for voting.
  3. Compliance Council Vote: Within 72 hours of submission, the Compliance Council votes to either approve or reject the prospective participant.
    1. Approval Rate: 3/4
    2. Quorum Rate: 75%
    3. Duration: 72 hours
  4. Authorization(or rejection): The new participant is either approved or rejected.
  5. Documentation: The proposal author from the Compliance Council coordinates with the Foundation to update Telcoin.org authorizations documentation.

Authorizations: Outcomes and Feedback

  • Proposal Affirmed: If the authorizations proposal is affirmed using the CCIP process, the new actor will be authorized according to their station.
  • Proposal Rejected: If the proposal is rejected by the Compliance Council, the dissenting members must provide a rationale as to (1) why it failed to meet their decision-making criteria and (2) constructive feedback to help modify the proposal to meet the criteria provided in the rationale.

Authorizations: Evaluative Criteria

  • Consistency with the Telcoin Association Constitution: Mission, Vision, Values
    • Does this proposal violate the purpose set out in the Telcoin Association constitution mission, vision, and values?
  • Consistency with the Boundary Rules: Eligibility and Authorization Rules
    • Attributes: Is the prospective actor eligible to participate in the based on their natural or acquired characteristics?
    • Conditions: Has the prospective actor followed the proper processes to enter the position?
  • Participation: Net new Actors participating in roles as a result of authorization processes
  • Efficiency: In use of resources and time
  • Accountability: Councils are held accountable to Miners concerning the policies and rules chosen.

CCIP Process Development Procedure

The following CCIP process is used by the Compliance Council to develop, alter and implement authorizations and conflict resolutions processes and systems.

  1. Forum Proposal: A forum member submits the CCIP proposal to the CCIP channel on the Telcoin Forum.
  2. Compliance Council Proposal: A Compliance Council or Telcoin Foundation member submits the CCIP proposal to the Compliance Council snapshot.
  3. Compliance Council Vote: Within 72 hours of submission, the Compliance Council votes to either approve or reject the proposal
  4. Implementation: If the proposal is approved, the Compliance Council implements on its own, with the Telcoin Foundation, or another party as outlined in the proposal.
  5. Documentation: The proposal author from the Compliance Council coordinates with the Foundation to update Telcoin.org documentation.

Process Development: Outcomes and Feedback

  • Proposal Affirmed: If the proposal is affirmed through the CCIP process, it will be implemented and documented according to the specification outlined in the proposal.
  • Proposal Rejected: If the proposal is rejected by the Compliance Council, the dissenting members must provide a rationale as to (1) why it failed to meet their decision-making criteria and (2) constructive feedback to help modify the proposal to meet the criteria provided in the rationale.

Process Development: Evaluative Criteria

  • Consistency with the Telcoin Association Constitution: Mission, Vision, Values
    • Does this proposal violate the purpose set out in the Telcoin Association constitution mission, vision, and values?
  • Feasibility Criteria: Technical, Economic, Financial, Legal, Political
    • Technical Feasibility: Can it be done? Is the potential course of action within the real of possibilities given existing knowledge and technical capabilities?
    • Economic Feasibility: Is it worth doing? Will the expected benefits to be derived from any course of action exceed the expected costs including the cost of other opportunities foregone? If this criterion can not be met, a course of action will leave people worse off than better off.
    • Financial Feasibility: Can sufficient revenues be generated with reference to a proposed course of action to cover expenditures?
    • Legal Feasibility: Is a proposed program of action lawful? Is the proposed program within the legal competence of an entrepreneur to undertake on his own authority?
    • Political Feasibility: Can the appropriate decisions be sustained?
  • Efficiency: In use of resources and time.
  • Participation: Processes should be low cost and accessible to all Miners
  • Accountability: Councils are held accountable to Miners concerning the policies and rules chosen.
  • Proportional Equivalence: The costs of the system should be less than or equal to the benefits derived from the system.