All news is verified and thoroughly reviewed by leading blockchain experts and seasoned industry insiders.
The Solana Foundation has officially launched the Solana Governance Proposals (SGP), a move that represents an important step in how the network approaches decision-making.
SGP vs SIMD: “Why” vs “How”
To understand SGP, you first have to understand what it is not. Naturally, many people will compare it to the current Solana Improvement Document (SIMD) process, but it serves two distinct purposes:
SIMDs are engineering blueprints: they answer “how” a technical change will be implemented. It is checked by core developers to ensure the integrity of the protocol.
- SGPs are directive mandates: They answer, “Should we do this?” These relate to community will and high-level strategy. Think of it this way: SGP is political will, while SIMD is engineering implementation.
A good example of this is the “Alpenglow” proposal. In the past, the community tried to move this through the SIMD process before the technical details were fully ready. This created friction because the developers needed a “green light” on the concept before spending time building the scheme. With the Small Grants ProgrammeThe community can now submit a “yes” vote first, validating the direction before the heavy engineering lifting begins.
| feature | SGP (Solana Governance Proposals) | SIMD (Solana Improvement Documentation) |
|---|---|---|
| Basic question | “Should we do this?” | “How exactly do we do this?” |
| to rise | High level, directional | Detailed protocol specifications |
| Decided by | Weighted voting on the chain | Technical review by core developers |
| Maturity is required | A clear idea that deserves community mention | Complete and executable design |
“Pressure valve”, not a power grab
It is a common misconception that SGP replaces the role of core developers. no. The SGP process is best described as an interrupt mechanism. The normal development pipeline – where developers propose SIMDs – continues to work as it always has. The SGP only begins when the community feels the decision is important enough to require a formal casting vote.
- Threshold: To stimulate a vote on the SGP, a proposal must receive support of at least 15% of the total active network share.
- Intention: This high barrier ensures that the network is not clogged with trivial sounds. It is a “pressure valve” reserved for matters of long-term economic impact where the community demands a seat at the table.
How the mechanics work
When an SGP program is initiated, it follows a structured and transparent path. Each proposal consists of a markdown document (detailing the rationale) and a linked record linked to a specific, immutable SHA commit. This ensures that the proposal being voted on cannot be changed midway through the process.
Voting rules:
- surrender: Requires a verifier with at least 100,000 SOL.
- Operator: 15% of the active share must indicate support to move to formal voting.
- consent: Requires a two-thirds majority (66.67%) of the “for” and “against” shares to participate (abstaining votes are excluded).
- Timetable: The entire cycle takes about 22 days (11 epochs) from the moment the support limit is reached until the final result.
The big picture: governance maturity
For many years, the criticism of Solana was his management style It was very centraland relies heavily on the experience of the core developers. While this approach allowed for incredible speed and performance, it also left participants and auditors feeling like passengers on someone else’s bus.
The SGP program changes this dynamic by codifying community voice. It does not hand over the keys to the kingdom to the DAO, nor does it slow down important engineering. Instead, it creates a formal channel for making economic and strategic decisions that previously relied on informal consensus.
The real test will be in the coming months. We will watch to see how often the 15% threshold is reached, and whether controversial economic changes are successfully channeled through this new process. For now, this represents a mature and thoughtful development for Solana. A way to balance the need for rapid, expert-led engineering with the necessity of community-supported governance.
