TLDR:
Zcash now operates at a 9-figure funding scale, but verification standards have not kept pace. I am proposing one rule for any entity holding over $5M for more than 12 months. They provide either an annual audit or quarterly read-only reporting. This improves accountability without changing who votes or how governance works. It works with ZCAP, THV, or any future model. Clear rules first, structural change later. ShieldOrder for ZCG (December 2025) - #37 by ShieldOrder
Accountability First Governance
Over the past week, the forum has had several overlapping discussions on governance structure, ZCAP, THV, conflicts of interest, and forum culture. These conversations are valuable, but share an underlying frustration: uncertainty about oversight of substantial community allocations.
Rather than debating who votes or where discussions happen, I want to propose one architectural improvement that works regardless of the voting mechanism we use now or in the future.
Funding Scale Has Changed, Verification Standards Have Not
ZCG manages an 8% block subsidy under ZIP 1014. The new lockbox configuration adds a separate long-horizon pool. Combined, the ecosystem is stewarding a nine-figure runway.
At this scale, the difference between informal visibility and formal verification becomes material. Every major treasury operating at this magnitude uses written, uniform verification rules. ZCG has not yet adopted such rules.
This is the gap we can close immediately without restructuring governance.
A Simple, Uniform Verification Rule
I propose a standing requirement for entities holding community funds above a materiality threshold.
If an organization holds more than $5M equivalent of community funds for longer than 12 months, it provides one of two proofs:
A. Annual independent financial audit
or
B. Narrow read-only reporting
A quarterly balance and cost table aligned to approved categories, with no spending authority and no operational intrusion.
This is not bureaucracy. It does not change who controls funds or alter governance structures. It aligns oversight with scale.
A 5 million threshold excludes small grants but covers major multiyear allocations. The twelve-month window distinguishes long-horizon custody from active project execution.
Why This Matters Now
Recent debates about conflicts, revolving doors, and voting mechanisms point to the same root cause: lack of systematic verification for large custodians over time.
A uniform rule solves this directly.
• Reduces need for case-by-case scrutiny;
• Removes personality from oversight;
• Avoids politicizing individual grantees;
• Makes long-horizon commitments easier to assess; and
• Works with ZCAP, THV, or any future governance model
This addresses accountability concerns without presupposing that specific problems exist today. It is preventive governance, not accusatory governance.
How This Complements Existing Processes
This does not replace committee judgment, milestone reviews, or grant structuring. It adds a baseline verification layer that makes those processes easier, more predictable, and less adversarial.
It separates two things that are currently blended.
-
Grant evaluation, which covers impact, clarity, alignment, deliverability, and verification
-
Long-term custody verification, which is addressed by the rule above
ZCG handles the first. The proposed rule strengthens the second.
My Grant Evaluation Framework
For grants, five consistent tests.
• Impact, measurable change in adoption, resilience, or capability;
• Clarity, milestones defined well enough to verify without interpretation;
• Alignment, reinforcement of core privacy and decentralization principles;
• Deliverability, credible sequencing and resourcing; and
• Verification, obvious success and drift signals.
I have publicly applied this to Brave, ZGo, and deterministic builds so voters can see how I evaluate these decisions. ZCG Nominations Now Open! - #61 by ShieldOrder and Zcash 90-Day Global Privacy Campaign via Brave — Dec 2025 through Feb 2026 - #5 by ShieldOrder
A Practical Path Forward
This proposal requires no ZIP changes, no governance overhaul, and no disruption to ongoing work. It is a scale-appropriate improvement that brings ZCG into alignment with common practice in other treasuries.
If elected, I will advocate for this verification rule with open discussion on threshold and implementation details.
Accountability first. Voting mechanism second.
Clear rules before structural change.
This is a practical path to long-term trust and effective oversight.