Formalized Sushi DAO Structure


Create & restructure critical roles within the DAO: Sushi CEO/CTO, Sushi Core Managers, and Board of Directors. Each of these departments will ensure transparency, accountability of its members, and the progression of Sushi.


There has been a lot of discourse recently between Sushi’s core, contributors, and the community. Several members have mentioned that they no longer feel the Sushi team is transparent enough about the work completed. In addition, core members feel overworked and underpaid, limiting their ability to engage with the community. We need a significant structural change that allows Sushi holders, community members, core, and contributors to have equal voices within the DAO but not create additional obstacles to getting work done.


We will have three key newly created roles within the DAO: Sushi CEO/CTO, Sushi Core Managers, and Board of Directors.

The Sushi CEO/CTO

Responsible for leading DAO vision and overseeing operations. Ensure the community knows about projects and roadmaps—face of the brand. This person must represent both the community & the core’s vision.


Abide by the Code of Ethics created by the community, publish an official quarterly roadmap for SUSHI (with deadlines based on tasks required), approve/review budgets provided by managers, directly provide KPIs for each department, and meet with department managers regularly. CTO can also settle disputes or concerns within departments & their members.

How do we prevent corruption of this position?

Core managers & board of directors can remove CTO via majority vote of core managers & board of directors or majority snapshot vote. This position answers to the Board of Directors.

Sushi Core Managers

There will be a designated manager for each department at Sushi: Marketing, Design, Development, Operations & Samurais. Elected by their team members, Managers are responsible for reporting to the CTO.


They set KPIs, oversee projects and collaborate with other departments to ensure success. Managers will submit budgets, staffing requirements, and project outcomes to the CTO. In addition, they can bring up internal issues to the CTO.

How do we prevent corruption of these positions?

The CTO can decide to off-board a manager with the majority consensus of the team members within their department. These positions answer the CTO.

Board of Directors / Ethics Committee

Five members voted on by the community shareholders will oversee the CTO, use Sushi’s Earnings, and address community concerns.


The board of directors can summon any members for public questioning and judgment. In addition, they can collect questions from the community and vote on whether a member breaches the code of ethics.

How do we prevent corruption of these positions?

CTO can request a member’s removal via snapshot vote. The community can also vote to remove a member with a majority vote. These positions answer the community shareholders.

Public Documents

Creating these roles will also need public documents created to provide transparency within Sushi.

Constitution / Operational Agreement

This document outlines each faction, CTO, Core Members, and Board of Directors’ organization, what duties each is responsible for, and power limitations.

To be included in this document taken from probatacta:

Proposed Structure for Decision-Making:

  • Tactical decisions: delegate to trusted decision-makers on Core Team; revert to Core Team org chart. If contention, raise to Board of Directors
  • Strategic decisions: delegate to the Board of Directors if information sensitive and no requirement of Treasury funds. If the outcome requires the substantial use of the Treasury assets, it should be held for a vote on the Snapshot like we already do
  • Disputed decisions: if the Core Team and Board of Directors cannot resolve an issue, the c will bring it to a vote on Snapshot

Code of Ethics

This document outlines what behaviors are not allowed within the DAO by core members, CTO, contributors, and shareholders. The ethics committee uses this as a guide for judgment. There will be a different code of ethics for CTO & Core and shareholders.

Bill of Rights

This document outlines the rights and responsibilities of core members and the community.

How to implement:

If approved, the Core & Community will need to appoint two members to oversee this transition.

After the Constitution / Operational Agreements are created based on this proposal by the core team with the community’s approval, Sushi Managers & Board of Directors will be elected.

Core members will vote on their department’s manager, and the community/shareholders will appoint a Board of Directors. A snapshot vote for Board of Directors & Discord Poll for Core Managers.

The Board of Directors’ first duty will be to draft the Code of Ethics.

After managers are appointed, they will appoint a Sushi CTO/CEO. The Sushi CTO will also need to be approved by the board of directors after they are appointed.

The CTO will address pressing core issues such as compensation, and the Board of Directors will address questions about past deals.


Sushi will transition to the proposed organizational structure


Sushi remains with its current structure.

  • Sushi will transition to the proposed organizational structure
  • Current Sushi organization structure will remain
  • Great start but, we need another approach

0 voters


why delegate the compensation package makeup to the CTO instead of proposing a parliament that has to approve the spendings proposed by the government?

this structure proposal is centralised a.f.

Sushi Parliament are token holders
They delegate sushipowa to delegates that choose to represent the people
Delegates form parties and propose courses of actions
Elections for representatives that belong to parties or run indepedently are held with ranked choice voting with all holders voting
Winning parties form the government
The government is the people implementing the will of the people (the Sushi Parliament)
The Sushi parliament holds the legitimacy conferred through voting by the people. They confer their legitimacy to their government, and they approve their spending through parliamentary voting.
If the government does not implement the program of the parties, they get voted out.
If the parliament fails to deliver on the will of the people, they get voted out.

A constitution is required, and it should have traceable contributions from all sushi token holders that want to contribute. They should write it together, amend it together, vote it together. Proposals for formats to achieve that are welcomed. People can inspire from past constitutional votes (e.g. Germany)

Sushi is a state. Sushi is a mission. Sushi is an ethos. Sushi is a soul. You won’t / can’t manage it as a company. Companies exploit value from employees. Sushi is of the people, for the people. Make it so in structure and thought.

Ethereum Name Server implemented delegation and representative democracy. It’s turning out quite awesome for them, with Centralised Exchanges partaking in the voting.
Synthetix implemented delegation and representative democracy. They have the SNX spartans.

I recommend reaching out cross other communities that already have implemented representative democracy formats, and comparing the formats. Make a comparative cost benefit analysis of the governance structures, and vote on them in a referendum after the constitution is written and voted in a referendum by all token holders


Also, add a new voting option. The voting options are not exhaustive. By setting the agenda of the response in a closed manner, you’re limiting the freedom of expression to your post and biasing results to fit a positive narrative to your centralised structure proposal.


Happy to see other people’s solutions. I tried to make as much checks and balances as possible

1 Like

I love your proposal in ethos, cause it has “Constitution” or named Operational Agreements which are tied to a legitimacy transfer between holders and an entity;

Do you have any ideas on how a constitution be created by the token holders, prior to an ethics committee being formed?

As I believe that in the scope of your proposal, the ethics commitee (judicial branch of governance) would be tasked with procedurally checking whether the constitution or procedural law (operational agreements) have been respected by those that they watch

Yeah in retrospect. It makes sense for both the community & core to draft the Consistution

1 Like