My full thoughts / Response on this topic: Proposal Response to Extending AIP-1 - the DAO Process — GeekApe
Just read through this, I feel the largest thing summarizing is that we need more clarity of tasks, goals, communications and what is happening
Obviously an AIP to extend the process is necessary. I will say that I feel this is a misstep overall from the council. I am unsure how the proper continuation plan was not already determined prior to arriving here. Voting NO to this does nothing for the DAO but create chaos. As far as voting goes … I would love to see some mechanisms integrated that keep Influencers from hoarding the positions. Unfortunately I have strong belief that the election will turn into a popularity contest with no accountability for “being qualified”. Of course qualifications are subjective and on a spectrum, but I am sure you can my point that many will suddenly show interest for a salary of 125K. I wonder if there isn’t a better payment methodology to incentivize the board members to be very active within the community. It is well known that only half the current board is active or even has a grasp on the community they represent. I understand that “board members” in the corporate world have similar “cush job” positions, but the whole point of web3 is to dissolve the tools of power that kept a few in charge of many. Just some of my current thoughts on the council framework & the state of the DAO. I hope everyone see’s the current problem we are in & understands that voting Yes is the correct move. That being said, there is still large room for improvement on the framework of the council & the election.
It’s not so much about voting yes or no at this point. I’d like to see specific changes incorporated into the proposal to align incentives properly to make this extension valuable to the DAO and the community. With these changes, I’d prefer to vote Yes but “as-is”, we would just be writing another blank check without any clear expectation of what this extension is supposed to deliver/achieve.
I disagree that it is a blank check. The clear expectation is simply in the ‘Rationale’ section above, and now we as a community is better engaged to create the election process. As Ap3father said, it is a misstep overall from the council that we are at this point, but it is what it is and we need to move forward.
@GeekApe I’m not sure which “specific changes to align incentives” you are suggesting. If you mean the changes you’ve suggested in the mirror post you linked above (30 days to provide a thorough election framework and process; 30 days to provide transition service; etc), then I support that. Otherwise, I would suggest being more specific.
And generally, I align more with the position that the failure to be prepared for re-election is a collective failure of all of the DAO including us as DAO members, and Cartan. I don’t think pinning it all on the special council is fair or productive. Particularly given the novel nature of the DAO and what we’re all trying to build.
You are right that it’s not a blank check. It’s actually a fairly well defined check of $750K. The “Rationale” section describes the “what” in general terms. My point is that given the size of this check, we need clearer milestones defined as to what we expect for these three months.
A fair point on putting it all on the the special council. The responsibility is indeed shared and therefore highlights our own role as the community and members of the DAO to be sharper in the description of our expectations.
Specifically for this thread as is relates to extending AIP-1, there is no need to over complicate things. These general terms are sufficient. I also read through your response to the extension, and while reasonable with many valid points, they aren’t necessarily needed to be implemented at this time for the extension to go through.
Do we need to spend additional weeks to modify their proposal to extend AIP-1 just to add a few lines which will ultimately have no impact on it getting approved (assuming it is good enough as written)? TBH that time is better spent focusing on collaborating together re: creating the nomination & election process. Ultimately, that is where you/the community can truly influence the future of the Foundation via the Board vote.
At this point the Special Council, Cartan, and the entire Ape community fully understand that the goal is to take this extension time to create a clear framework and process for the community to nominate, vet, and elect new council members. It-is-what-it-is regarding the crappy situation about the extension, but let’s just extend this thing and move on to the real work.
Getting into the weeds of milestones should be reserved for the work related to the nomination and election process, which we will all conduct together over the next ~3 months. If the Board doesn’t appropriately facilitate this nomination and election process, then the writing is on the wall they’ll be replaced [IMO we can do much better than the proposed “rolling election” structure by putting most seats up for vote while still maintaining continuity].
Last, I will say that Cartan is actually doing a terrific job. Unfortunately due to the Board’s poor communication, the broader community is not as aware of the pivotal role Cartan plays as the service provider physically based in Cayman Islands to help maintain the legal and tax structure of ApeCoin Foundation. Besides, since we aren’t going to kick out Cartan anytime soon without a detailed transition plan that would take quite some time to develop anyway, it is not necessary to spend time worrying about that over the next 3 months. It is very difficult for the DAO to agree on anything so it needs a single focus about all this…the nomination & election process.
Nothing bad to say about this. I agree entirely.’
Your topic will be automatically closing in less than 24 hours. Are you content with the feedback received, or do you wish to extend community discussion for a further 7 days?
If we do not hear from you within 48 hours after your topic closes, your topic will be moved straight to the AIP Draft process.
We look forward to hearing from you.
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
I am content with the feedback and wish to move forward to the AIP Draft phase.
Thank you @btang for your ideas and the ApeCoin DAO community for the thoughtful discussions. A moderator will get in touch with the author to draft the AIP in the appropriate template. Once the AIP is drafted and meets all the DAO-approved guidelines, the proposal will be posted on Snapshot for live official voting at: Snapshot
Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments. @btang please see your messages for the next steps.
Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,
@btang has completed editing their AIP Idea to be their AIP Draft.
Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.
Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,
This proposal is live for Snapshot vote at Snapshot. The voting period closes next Wednesday at 9PM ET.
The AIP implementation is administered by the Ape Foundation. Implementation may be immaterially or materially altered to optimise for security, usability, to protect APE holders, and otherwise to effect the intent of the AIP. Any material deviations from an AIP, as initially approved, will be disclosed to the APE holder community.
Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,
The voting period has closed for this proposal and it has been accepted with a 99.82% pass rate. The proposal will be passed on for implementation.