BadgerdaoBadgerdao governance
BADGER enables collective governance in BadgerDAO, with voting available through Snapshot. A proposal's recorded voting outcome and terms establish whether it advanced and what its approval covered.
- Governance token
- BADGER supports collective decision-making; individual proposals specify the decisions and parameters under consideration.
- Proposal format
- Badger Improvement Proposals (BIPs) document proposed changes. A BIP number alone does not establish approval or implementation.
- Decision-making roles
- BADGER holders vote through Snapshot; the Treasury Council has also announced product and funding decisions.
How did BIP 80 reach implementation?
The BIP 80 restitution proposal, published December 31, 2021, specified its own voting route. Its sequence shows how approval of a program can precede selection of a component's parameters.
| Stage | Decision and applicable scope |
|---|---|
| Define the proposal | BIP 80 addressed non-recoverable losses from the December 2, 2021 exploit, excluding DIGG. It proposed several restitution components. |
| Discuss before voting | The proposal reserved its first 48 hours for clarification, with no voting option during that period. |
| Approve progression | A yes/no vote would determine whether to proceed. Legitimacy concerns could lead to adjustments or moving approval to Snapshot before the component 2 vote. |
| Select component 2 parameters | If initial approval passed, a ranked-choice Snapshot vote would choose the BADGER allocation and distribution duration for remBadger. |
| Implement the selected terms | BIP 91's April 13, 2022 account described an existing remBadger vault created under BIP 80. It recorded approval for distributions totaling 2,000,000 BADGER over two years. |
| Separate approvals | BIP 80's proposed stablecoin vaults and farming funded by borrowing against uncirculating BADGER still required separate governance proposals. |
Ranked-choice voting let participants order the available options by preference. BIP 80 specified selection when an option reached a majority. Otherwise, the option with the fewest votes would drop out. Its votes would move to each voter's next remaining preference, repeating until an option held a majority.
Can a forum vote stop a proposal?
The BIP 91 reinstatement request sought an exception for a holder who had withdrawn underlying BADGER from remBadger. The original vault permitted withdrawals but no deposits, and exiting forfeited the holder's future BADGER distributions.
BIP 91 proposed a contract upgrade allowing a whitelisted wallet to make a one-time deposit and restore its position. The topic's closing title records that it did not pass the forum vote, despite the "Pending" label inside.
How did later governance change restitution terms?
BadgerDAO's Restitution 2.0 announcement , published May 16, 2024, described a continuation approved through BIP 103 and amendments. The approved terms allocated 1,000,000 BADGER to the program and restricted participation to existing remBADGER holders. They also allowed Andy and Steve to enter the original program with their original stakes.
The new bremBADGER locking vault's deposit window ran from May 20 to June 3, 2024. Its rules preserved each participant's BADGER allocation when the program allowed remBADGER withdrawals. That differed from the original remBadger withdrawal consequence, within a separate program whose enrollment window has ended.
Which decisions did the Treasury Council announce?
The Treasury Council's June 11, 2025 transition notice announced eBTC deprecation and a funding change. Funding for the Swiss-based Badger Association would end on June 30, 2025. The notice also scheduled removal of the eBTC, remBadger, and Legacy Vault interfaces after that date. Those interfaces have since closed, while direct contract access remains available.
The council cited low total value locked and a lack of sustainable revenue when reducing eBTC investment.