Request for Proposal (RFP): Compound DAO Voting Service Provider (VSP)

I appreciate that the GWG is bringing this initiative forward based on interest from some delegates in exploring infrastructure alternatives.

That said, I want to respectfully express concern regarding the process behind this proposal. According to CIP-1—a governance process the community formally adopted via Snapshot—decisions regarding off-chain governance processes or tooling, such as launching an RFP process for evaluating vendors, should be proposed through a Meta Process CIP and approved via Snapshot signal vote.

While it’s true that formal processes like CIP-1 haven’t always been strictly followed in recent months, the Governance Working Group, of all groups, should be setting some kind of standard when it comes to process. Taking on new responsibilities—like unilaterally initiating an RFP and defining its structure—without clear delegation sets a problematic precedent.

Informal delegate conversations and community sentiment are valuable inputs—but they aren’t a substitute for actual votes. If the GWG believes there is a strong case to pursue an RFP program, the appropriate path is clear: draft a proposal and put it to a snapshot vote. Until that happens, this process lacks legitimacy and CGWG can’t solicit vendors on behalf of the Compound protocol.

To be clear, I’m not necessarily opposed to evaluating new infrastructure or providers. I’m opposed to the process proceeding without an established mandate from a formal governance decision.

3 Likes