Free TON Governance Organizational Structure (GOS) Contest [Open to be discussed]

Online link:!AlMFOGc4oWlod0UH0fliRYElHrs?e=hzEvgs .


Decentralization has been essential nature of Free TON from day one. Currently, there are many different tasks in the Free TON and they are growing rapidly and becoming more complicated. The Free TON community has been committed to organize tasks through a decentralized governance. This goal has been realized via stratified governance, including sub-governances with specific tasks.

This contest seeks for an improved governance organizational structure (GOS) to support and facilitate the Free TON decentralization.

A schematic of current governance organizational structure of Free TON (a general view without details) is shown below:

Currently, there is a main governance at top of the Free TON governance structure, and there are all of the sub-governances under the main governance in just one flat layer. Can this structure be improved for better organization of Free TON governance and efficient decentralization? For example, some sub-governances such as A&S , DGO and Free TON Academy (as an upcoming sub-governance) have a managerial and analytical nature, and therefore their position should be different with other sub-governances, in the GOS. This contest aims to re-design and improve the Free TON GOS in order to support full decentralization via an agile, flexible and more efficient GOS.

P.S.: New sub-governances including global community, influencers and community voice were recently passed to be formed.



Contest Entry Period :

December XX, 11:59 PM UTC [2 days after passing] - December XX, 23:59 PM UTC [duration=8 days].

Voting Cycle:

5 days


The GOS should describe (but not limited to):

  • [organizational structure]: the most suitable and compatible governance organizational chart for Free TON. Which type of organization chart (Hierarchical, Divisional, Matrix, Horizontal, …) is more suitable for decentralized governance organization of Free TON, and why? Any Free TON specific and customized organizational chart rather than traditional charts (Hierarchical, Divisional, Matrix, Horizontal, …) is also welcome.

  • [top level chart]: a top-level structure that shows the main governance, and the relationships and relative ranks of sub-governances to each other and to main governance.

  • [detail level chart]: the most suitable and compatible organizational chart for sub-governances with details including members roles, requirements, qualifications, soft and hard features, facilities, goals, missions …

  • [organizational roles]: the governance and sub-governances functions, tasks, duties, responsibilities, and categories.

  • [workflow]: the sub-governances internal and external interactions, processes, workflows, inputs, and outputs. Currently all subgovernances work separately. However, some of them can receive services from some others. This workflow shows external relations among sub-governances and establish a flow of information, documents, products and services among them as well. Moreover, it will help sub-governances to design and implement more useful and purposeful contests and competitions.

  • [efficiency]: this clarifies any possible overlap of duties and tasks among current sub-governances and proposes a duties apportion scheme to resolve it.

  • [supervision]: a scheduled supervision plan is needed to evaluate the sub-governances performance. This will also resolve any disagreements and miss-understandings, and prevent any unsolvable organizational problems.

  • [development & expansion]: a list of new potential sub-governances for launching in the future, with justifications and feasibility study.

Evaluation criteria and winning conditions:

  • [Important]: The GOS should reflect and support “decentralization” as the main focus of Free TON and avoid to reinforce any “centralization” role.

  • Note that Free TON is not an organization, and hence we don’t need for an organizational chart for Free TON itself. We need to organize “Free TON governance” as the main infrastructure of decentralization in Free TON.

  • It should be drafted considering long-term vision of Free TON governance

  • It should be compatible with Free TON brand, positioning, goals and mission.

  • It should be flexible In the event of a need for changes in the future.

  • The GOS should consider environmental opportunities and risks of Free TON in blockchain industry in order to enable Free TON governance for future agile movements.

  • It should provide a reference for community, team, subgovernances to help them understand their role in Free TON governance .

  • The structure should be simple, coherent, flexible, with the least amount of ambiguity, and absence of redundant and useless chart layers .


  • The juror must have a solid understanding of the described subject in order to provide a score and feedback. If not, the juror should choose to “Abstain”.

  • Jurors or whose team(s) intend to participate in this contest by providing submissions lose their right to vote in this contest.

  • Each juror will vote by rating each submission on a scale of 1 to 10 or can choose to reject it if it does not meet requirements or vote “Abstain” if they feel unqualified to judge.

  • Jurors must provide feedback on submissions or lose their reward.

  • The Jury will reject duplicate, sub-par, incomplete, or inappropriate submissions.

Winner rewards :

1 place ……………………………………………10,000 Tons

2 place …………………………………………… 8,000 Tons

3 place …………………………………………… 6,000 Tons

4-10 places ………………………………………. 2,000 Tons each one

Note: If the number of winning submissions is less than the number of rewards available, any remaining rewards are not subject to distribution and are considered void.

Jury rewards:

An amount equal to 10% of the sum total of all total tokens actually awarded will be

distributed equally between all jurors who vote and provide feedback. Both voting and feedback are mandatory in order to collect the reward.

Procedural remarks:

  • Participants must upload their work correctly so it can be viewed and accessible in the formats described. If work is inaccessible or does not fit the criteria described, the submission may be rejected by jurors.

  • Participants must submit their work before the closing of the filing of applications. If not submitted on time, the submission will not count.


Anyone can participate, but Free TON cannot distribute Tons to US citizens or US entities.


Hello everyone,

As you know, there is now a stratified governance, including sub-governances with specific tasks, in Free TON. The aim is to support rapid, agile and efficient decentralization. We, in Iranian community, think that an enhance governance organizational structure (GOS) is requiered to support and facilitate the Free TON decentralization. This proposal seeks for such an improved GOS. My pleasure to present this proposal for furhter discussion by community and specially by A&S members.

Wish you all the best


It could enrich infrastructure of decentralization. Designing the most fitted organizational structure is vital for all organnizations and communities, including Free TON governance.

I think it is all along the way of A&S. If the sg has a same opinion may support to run it faster.


That’s practically what I was thinking, only at the scale of Web and Design subgovernance. I think it would be great to have each subgovernance do the internal work of creating an internal vision, systematizing processes and input and output channels.

Perhaps there should be some kind of internal statute for each SG, so that there is something to fall back on when working in them. Also for faster entry of new participants.

1 Like

Thank you for your interest and comment. :+1:

The organizational structure plays the role of a “river” for “water”.

The more regular, cohesive, and agile this structure is, the more efficient the overall activities in Free TON will be and the more targeted the results will be. Designing a proper GOS prevents energy waste and concentrates all movements in the direction of the goals.

Let’s look at this proposal to improve the efficiency of all activities and actions that are performing in the Free TON platform.

I, as an expert in the field of Systems Engineering, think this contest can be usefull at current stage of Free TON life cycle. Just as an expert advice and consultation to A&S SG.


I like this contest proposal. It would be nice if the implementation was technically possible. Governance must be coordinated using blockchain. I think that in the future, governance should be more on-chain.


Thanks for your support, :raised_hands:

Currenlty, we have an on-chain GOS, So an improved GOS can also be on-chain, I think. The aims and scope of A&S and DGO sub-governances include such improvements, IMO.

1 Like

I already shared this finding with members of DGO subgov. Thats it:
It’s a muldisciplinary team that worked on creating digital governance for web 3.0 organisations (mastodon, colony, etc.)
Think that base that they collected can be powerful for researching:

It also seems to me that this contest will need people from different sub-govs to give their insides perspective. What do you think about preparing a questionnaire and sending it out to the members of all govs? From that, we could create more insightful technical documentation for a subsequent contest.


I was hoping that the members of the community as well as the members of A&S would comment on this proposal. This is just my view point about a current necessary improvement for Free TON. I just wanted community to continue this if the community finds it useful. If you are interested, I leave the rest to you and the A&S members.

I would just like to emphasize once again on the main philosophy of this proposal:

  • Decentralization is a new kind of “organizing”.
  • Of course, we all belive that it is the most effiient kind of “organizing”.
  • It will be achieved through an infrastructure (we call it GOS).
  • Free TON now has a GOS. But it is the simplest possible kind of GOS (refer to the figure inside the proposal above).
  • This proposal seeks for an improved version of Free TON GOS.

Hope to be accepted

Thank you !

  1. A network like structure feels more decentralised. Could learn from the earlier adopters of decentralised organisation. (
  2. On-chain governance sounds interesting, haven’t seen one in action.
  3. Perhaps some skin in the game from the founders of the respective sub-governance, i.e staking against completion of projects and proposals.
    4 an open academy SG for knowledge transfer or upgrade sounds interesting.
  4. Do we create SG from a functional perspective or from a geographical perspective? Or we just let everyone and anyone create their SGs, and allow the survival of the fitest to prevail? (Then back to Q3, should we ask for some skin in the game?)
  5. Perhaps move our current focus on mass awareness creation / adoption to focus on more pilot projects to bring applications and businesses on chain?

Just sharing.

Thank you for sharing. Very useful insights.