Handing over power
This page describes who holds power in the Novus Ignis Foundation today, why it is not meant to stay that way and how we propose to hand it over. It expands on a short section of the Who we are page; the details are in chapter 9 of the Foundation Principles whitepaper.
The foundation was established by one person, Marcin Wołowski, who today holds the most power in it. At the beginning this is natural, but we do not want it to stay this way. The foundation is to endure thanks to the usefulness of its tools and principles that allow others to take over responsibility, not thanks to the constant presence of one person.
More: Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 9.
What the founder can do today#
The statute, that is, the foundation's law, gives the founder three special powers:
- the founder appoints and dismisses board members, and may also join the board and be its president (§ 13(3));
- the board is appointed for an indefinite period, that is, without a term of office (no period of service fixed in advance) (§ 13(4));
- the statute can be changed only by the whole board, unanimously. If the founder does not sit on the board, the founder's prior consent is also required (§ 15(1)).
Until binding community voting is launched, the foundation operates in an agile phase. For now the community does not cast binding votes: decisions, including those about expenses, are made by the board within the limits of the law and the statute, and the community is asked for its opinion in consultations.
More: statute, § 13 and § 15, and Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 2.
Why this is meant to change#
The manifesto says it plainly: we are working toward gradually phasing out the founder's special powers and handing over to the community real influence on the foundation's direction and on the choice of the people who manage it. The community's decisions are to bind the board within the limits of the law, the statute and the security of the services. The founder wants to use Suveria, Omniforum and further projects on the same terms as everyone else and to withdraw from a permanent public role.
The whitepaper recalls Cincinnatus here: according to Livy, in 458 BC envoys found him working in his field with the news that he had been entrusted with supreme power for the duration of a war. On the sixteenth day, when the danger had passed, he gave it up and returned to his farm. Responsibility is taken on for a time and then handed over.
More: manifesto, section 7.1 and Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 5.
A path in six steps#
The handover is meant to be effective on paper and in practice. Changing the statute is not enough: the people taking over responsibility must also receive access to bank accounts, domains, repositories (places where we store code), infrastructure and keys.
The whitepaper proposes six steps. As of 31 October 2026: this is a proposal, and none of these steps has been completed yet; the list of the founder's powers in chapter 9 of the whitepaper is the beginning of the first.
- A list of powers and access. We describe what powers the founder has today and who has access to what.
- Rules. We set rules for selecting people, terms of office, dismissal and accountability.
- A readiness report, that is, an assessment by independent people of whether the foundation is ready for the handover of power. The assessors publish it as a report.
- A change to the statute. We introduce terms of office for the board, community participation in choosing the people who manage the foundation and the phasing out of the founder's special powers (change Z5 in the statute change register).
- Selection of people. At the start, the first multi-person board with a term of office is appointed by the founder, after an open call and a consultation. Subsequent boards are elected by the community.
- Handover of access. We hand over access and check whether the handover has really been completed.
The founder's special powers are to expire according to conditions written into the statute, not by virtue of a declaration alone. This requires statute changes that do not exist yet (Z5 in the change register).
More: Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 9 and statute change register, change Z5.
The readiness report and the election date#
In the readiness report (the third step), the assessors describe whether powers and access are listed, the rules of selection adopted, and the services can be handed over without interrupting their operation. The report also shows dissenting opinions and the conflicts of interest of the people who prepared it.
We set the election date before this assessment, together with the exceptional reasons for which it may be postponed and the way to appeal against such a decision, so that the readiness assessment does not become a way of postponing elections. One of the variants under consideration is elections no later than 90 days after the report is published. This is a variant to consider, not a decision that has been made.
More: Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 9.
What if the founder were unable to act#
We are also examining what would happen if the founder were unable to act before the handover is complete, and how to avoid a deadlock on statute changes that require the board's unanimity. The documents raise this question but do not yet give an answer.
More: Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 9.
Competence before money#
We appoint a person to the board for their competence and a shared direction, never for a contribution. A board member can be a donor like anyone else: their payments go into the register on the same terms and give them nothing beyond what any donor has.
A Council for Dialogue and Cooperation can be established for conversation among people with different experiences. It would serve a purely advisory function, with no supervisory or executive powers and no additional vote. Its composition and the length of participation still need to be determined.
More: Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 9.
What we do not promise#
- Dates. The responsibility handover plan does not exist yet. It is the plan that will set the date of the first review and regular progress reports, also before a voting system exists. The statute change register describes Z5 as a direction: the first stage and its date will be set by this plan. At the same time, the lack of a reserve for the further pillars does not justify postponing the handover indefinitely.
- Management by digital intelligence. The manifesto describes a vision in which digital intelligence could one day manage the foundation on its own, within limits set by people and with respect for the community's binding decisions. This is a vision, not a plan for the coming years: today the foundation is managed by people, and digital intelligence helps them with analyses and with writing documents.
More: manifesto, section 7.1 and section 7.2, Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 10, and the statute change register.
Read and tell us what you think#
The full description: Foundation Principles whitepaper, chapter 9, manifesto, chapter 7 and statute. If something puzzles you or seems wrong, highlight that passage in the document and use the “I have a comment” button, or write to salve@novusignis.org.