Axynom
  • Introduction
    • What is Axynom?
    • Vision & Mission
  • Why Now
  • Founder's Note
  • The Problem
    • Centralized growth traps
  • Token reward inflation and failure
  • Lack of contributor alignment
  • Gatekeeping in Web3
  • Axynom Solution Overview
    • Proof of Growth (PoG)
    • Contributor as a Stakeholder
    • Transparent Rewards and Governance
  • Modular Ecosystem Architecture
  • PoG: Proof of Growth System
    • What is PoG
    • How Contributions Work
    • Voting and Governance Flow
  • GP: Growth Points
  • Role of Admins, Moderators, and Community
  • Examples of Valid Contributions
  • Axynom Token (AXY)
    • Token Utility
    • Tokenomics
  • Transfer Tax Logic
  • Governance Eligibility
  • Vesting and Distribution
  • Staking Mechanics
    • Lock Periods and APY
    • Early Exit Penalties
    • Sustainability Model
  • Treasury and Ecosystem Pools
    • Overview of Pools
    • Role of the Treasury
    • POL Strategy (Protocol-Owned Liquidity)
  • CaaS (Contributions-as-a-Service)
    • What is CaaS
    • Exporting the PoG System
    • Integration Possibilities
    • Revenue Model for Axynom
  • Governance & Voting
    • Governance Phases
    • Voting Power (AXY + GP)
    • Quorum & Approval Logic
    • No ‘Adjust GP’ Rule
  • Gas Economics
    • Why Arbitrum One
    • Axynom L3 Chain with AXY as Gas
  • Product Roadmap
    • Phase 1: MVP Launch (Staking, PoG, Treasury)
    • Phase 2: CaaS, L3 Chain, Scaled Contributor Base
    • Key Milestones
    • TGE Timeline (After Product-Market Fit)
  • Security & Audits
    • Upgradability Practices
    • Modular Contract Architecture
    • Audit Strategy Post-TGE
    • Role of Community Peer Review
  • KPI Forecast & Growth Goals
    • Contributors, GP Points, Stakers, TVL
    • Expected PoG Submissions
    • Treasury Size & Rewards Flow
    • Marketing & KOL Activation Plans
  • Conclusion
    • Axynom Is Not a Product. It’s a Protocol.
    • Call to Builders, Shillers, Designers, Thinkers
    • How to Get Involved
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  • Phase 1: Admin-Governed Foundation
  • Phase 2: Hybrid Community Governance
  • Phase 3: DAO-Ready Governance Framework
  1. Governance & Voting

Governance Phases

Axynom’s governance system is structured to evolve over time. Rather than launching with full decentralization immediately, which often leads to inefficiency or capture, Axynom follows a phased approach that balances operational stability with increasing community control.

The governance design recognizes that different stages of protocol maturity require different models of decision-making. Each phase builds on the previous one, preparing the protocol for a future where contributors, stakers, and ecosystem participants govern Axynom directly and effectively.


Phase 1: Admin-Governed Foundation

In the earliest phase, core protocol operations, contribution approvals, and major treasury decisions are managed by a small group of designated admins.

Key characteristics:

  • Admins are responsible for approving contributions, assigning GP, and ensuring the system’s integrity.

  • Treasury allocations, staking parameters, and reward pool management are handled internally, with public reporting.

  • Smart contract upgrades (if needed) are proposed and executed by the core team using multisig controls.

The primary goal of this phase is to maintain consistency, refine contributor workflows, and establish operational stability. Transparency is prioritized through open reporting of admin actions, but formal community voting mechanisms are limited.


Phase 2: Hybrid Community Governance

As Axynom grows and a base of committed contributors and stakers is established, community voting is gradually introduced.

In this phase:

  • Contribution approvals involve community voting, where eligible stakers and contributors participate.

  • Proposals for major protocol changes (e.g., staking rate adjustments, treasury strategies) require signaling through off-chain governance platforms or light on-chain voting.

  • Admins retain final execution rights for high-risk operations but are increasingly accountable to community decisions.

This phase trains the community in governance participation while preserving operational resilience during scaling.


Phase 3: DAO-Ready Governance Framework

After Axynom demonstrates sustainable participation, economic maturity, and contributor consistency, the governance system transitions toward a DAO-ready architecture.

Key characteristics:

  • Critical protocol upgrades, treasury movements beyond predefined thresholds, and major incentive program launches require formal proposal and vote cycles.

  • Multisig signer roles are expanded to include elected community members or contributors with proven participation records.

  • Governance is modular, allowing sub-DAOs or working groups to emerge for specific functions without needing monolithic control structures.

The DAO framework is designed to support scalability, flexibility, and contributor ownership without sacrificing protocol security.

The timeline for reaching Phase 3 is not fixed. It depends on hitting specific participation, contribution, and treasury health milestones, which will be defined and published as part of Axynom’s roadmap tracking.


Each phase exists to serve the needs of the protocol at that moment, balancing control, flexibility, and contributor empowerment carefully.

PreviousRevenue Model for AxynomNextVoting Power (AXY + GP)

Last updated 1 month ago