From discussion to a formal, votable proposal
A governance proposal rarely starts as an on-chain transaction. It typically begins as an informal discussion, often on a forum, where someone floats an idea, describes its rationale, and gathers early feedback and objections while the plan is still cheap to change. If the idea survives that discussion with enough support, it's often refined into a formal, non-binding signal, such as an off-chain Snapshot temperature check, to confirm there's broad enough interest before anyone spends the effort or gas of drafting an actual on-chain proposal. This staged funnel exists because formal on-chain proposals are comparatively expensive and hard to revise once submitted, so cheap, reversible discussion filters out ideas that would never pass long before they reach the governor contract.
Once a proposal is ready, it gets submitted to the governor contract as a formal transaction, which typically bundles the exact contract calls it wants executed (which function, on which contract, with which parameters) alongside a description. This bundling matters: token holders aren't voting on a vague intention, they're voting on a specific, pre-committed set of actions that will run verbatim if the proposal passes, which is what makes the eventual execution trustworthy rather than discretionary.