Skip to main content
SURCHI is governed entirely by its token holders through an on-chain Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO). There is no privileged team multisig with unchecked authority, no shadow board, and no back-room decision-making. Every material protocol decision — from fee adjustments to Sentinel upgrades — flows through community governance. SURCHI’s zero team allocation model means the community holds the tokens and, by extension, holds the power.

​
DAO Architecture

The SURCHI DAO is built on four interlocking components that together ensure decisions are transparent, binding, and resistant to capture.

Token-Weighted Voting

Staked SURCHI tokens represent voting power. The more tokens you stake, the more weight your vote carries. Voting power is snapshotted at the time a proposal is created.

On-Chain Proposals & Execution

Governance proposals are submitted, debated, and ratified entirely on-chain. Approved proposals are executed via smart contract with no manual intervention required.

Multisig Treasury

Protocol funds are held in a multi-signature treasury wallet. No single keyholder — including any core contributor — can unilaterally move funds. All disbursements require a governance vote followed by multisig execution.

Governance Forum

On-chain votes are preceded by open discussion in the SURCHI Governance Forum. Any community member can propose ideas, debate parameters, and build consensus before a formal vote is called.

​
Governance Domains

The DAO has authority over all material aspects of the SURCHI protocol. Core governance domains include:
The DAO sets and adjusts the operational parameters that govern how SURCHI functions — including execution fees, signal thresholds, trade size limits, slippage caps, and API rate limits. No parameter change takes effect without a passed proposal.
All deployment of community treasury funds requires a governance vote. This includes ecosystem grants, developer bounties, infrastructure spending, marketing campaigns, and any buyback-and-burn programs.
When the Sentinel AI models are updated — whether for accuracy improvements, new data sources, or architectural changes — the DAO must approve the new version before it is activated in production.
Adding new capabilities to Alpha, Liquidity, or Execution Sentinels — or activating features currently in development — requires DAO sign-off. The community decides when new intelligence layers go live.
In the event of a security incident, exploit attempt, or market emergency, the DAO can vote to pause protocol activity. Emergency governance tracks operate on compressed timelines with supermajority thresholds.
Formal partnerships, protocol integrations, and joint ventures that carry the SURCHI name or involve community resources require DAO approval. Unofficial collaborations do not bind the protocol.

​
Who Can Participate

Any SURCHI token holder can participate in governance. There are no whitelists, no invitation gates, and no minimum holdings to read or discuss proposals. To cast a binding vote, you must stake your SURCHI tokens before the snapshot block of any given proposal. Voting weight is directly proportional to your staked balance at snapshot time — if you hold 1% of the staked supply, your vote carries 1% of the total weight. Participation is encouraged at every level:
  • Read and follow proposals in the Governance Forum — no stake required
  • Comment and debate — shape proposals before they go on-chain
  • Vote — stake SURCHI and cast binding votes on active proposals
  • Propose — any token holder meeting the minimum proposal threshold can submit a formal on-chain proposal

How to Vote

Step-by-step guide to staking, reviewing proposals, and casting your vote.

Treasury

How the DAO treasury is structured, secured, and allocated.

Decentralization Roadmap

How SURCHI progressively transitions to full community sovereignty.

Governance Forum

Join the live governance discussion.
The DAO is the final authority on all protocol decisions. The core team operates within boundaries set by governance — not the other way around. Any team action that exceeds those boundaries can be reversed by a community vote.