Skip to main content

​
Governance

Livepeer uses a hybrid on‑chain/off‑chain governance model. Off‑chain processes (discussion, working groups and signalling) allow the community to debate and refine ideas in an open forum. On‑chain votes then bind those ideas into protocol upgrades or fund allocations. This separation keeps on‑chain transactions minimal while maximising community input and transparency.

​
Livepeer Improvement Proposals (LIPs) and Special‑Purpose Entities (SPEs)

The primary mechanism for protocol change is the Livepeer Improvement Proposal (LIP). LIPs are structured documents (hosted on GitHub) that specify technical changes, parameter adjustments or governance processes—similar to Ethereum’s EIPs. The lifecycle of a LIP follows a deliberate cadence:
  1. Idea & discussion – Anyone can raise an idea on the Livepeer forum or Discord. Early feedback from developers, orchestrators and delegators helps identify trade‑offs.
  2. Special‑Purpose Entity formation – Complex ideas often result in the formation of a Special‑Purpose Entity (SPE): a working group of community members who scope the problem, research alternatives, produce specifications and estimate resource requirements. SPEs operate off‑chain and are accountable to the community. Their outputs (roadmaps, budgets, deliverables) are published for review.
  3. Drafting & staking requirement – Once a proposal is mature, the authors draft a LIP using a standard template and open a pull request against the protocol repository. Proposers must have at least 100 LPT bonded on‑chain to submit a LIP; this requirement discourages spam and aligns proposers with network interests.
  4. Formal review & revision – The LIP is reviewed by the community, core developers and the Livepeer Foundation. Feedback is incorporated, and the proposal may be revised multiple times. The review period typically lasts at least two weeks.
  5. Snapshot signalling – Before moving on‑chain, proposers may conduct a Snapshot vote (off‑chain token‑weighted poll) to gauge sentiment. This step is non‑binding but can reveal concerns or consensus early.
  6. On‑chain vote – Finally, the LIP is submitted to the governance smart contract for a binding vote. Voting is open for a set period (e.g., seven days). If quorum and majority thresholds are met (see below), the proposal is queued for execution.
This process encourages thorough vetting and prevents hasty upgrades. SPEs can also request funding from the community treasury to implement approved proposals, and they must regularly report progress to retain trust. Why governance is off‑chain first Livepeer separates deliberation from execution. Off‑chain discussions in forums and working groups allow ideas to evolve without incurring gas costs or spamming the chain. Requiring proposers to bond 100 LPT ensures that those who submit proposals have some skin in the game. The formation of SPEs prevents ad‑hoc groups from capturing funding; by requiring deliverables, budgets and accountability, the process balances openness with diligence.
Last modified on February 18, 2026