L2 migration PM interview: governance layer — how to implement governance for a blockchain network (best practices)

To ensure decentralized governance in Layer 2 smart contracts, prioritize a transparent and adaptable framework, often through a modular approach. Implement token-weighted voting or quadratic voting, depending on the goal, but consider reputation-based models as well to balance influence among stakeholders and avoid whales disproportionately affecting outcomes.

In Layer 2 environments, scalability can sometimes clash with decentralization. Layering governance structures—such as creating councils, committees, or DAOs with tiered voting—enables efficient, smaller-scale decisions while preserving broader community involvement. Delegate voting can also help ensure more voices are heard without overburdening the network. For security, multi-signature (multi-sig) wallets and time-locked functions are critical safeguards, preventing sudden changes by requiring consensus and offering time for the community to react.

Finally, regular auditing and on-chain transparency tools allow participants to monitor and verify actions, adding a layer of accountability. Platforms like Aragon or Snapshot can support Layer 2 governance needs with customizable, scalable options that integrate well across ecosystems.

Thanks for your help. Can you explain more about Aragon and Snapshot platforms for layer 2 governance needs? I am struggling with customisable options.

I’d treat Snapshot and Aragon as two different jobs.

Snapshot is basically “cheap voting / direction setting.” Great when you want people to participate without gas drama. But the vote doesn’t execute itself — you still need someone/something to actually push the change onchain (multisig, governor, whatever your setup is). That’s where teams get messy: vote passes, then execution is delayed or “reinterpreted”.

Aragon is for when you want decisions to be binding (treasury/permissions/roles). It’s heavier though — bad role/permission configs can hurt you more than a bad vote. If you’re doing L2 migration governance, I’ve seen teams use Snapshot for signaling + an onchain setup for execution, with timelocks/multisig so upgrades can’t be rushed.

Also curious how people decide tools here. Snapshot feels easy for participation, but then it becomes “okay… now what?” How do you choose a governance tool for decentralized teams when you’re migrating to L2 and upgrades/treasury changes can’t be casual?