AIP-183: Cartan’s Proven Track Record & Continued Commitment to Advancing the ApeCoin Ecosystem

Final AIPs Rejected AIPs
22

Hi @btang,

I’d like to thank you for your services this far and generally the excellent work of the team behind you.

I do however have several questions specifically relating to the APECOIN TWITTER FEED:

  1. How do you choose which AIPs to retweet and which ones to not, what is the process for this selection?
  2. Do you agree we should be fair and impartial and use DAO media channels to champion unbias behaviours, by simply adding equal exposure to all the AIPs? (One rule for all.)
  3. Why are you so aggressively retweeting APECOMMS tweets?
  4. Do you think a code of conduct team or similar could be needed as we grow, especially for areas where large amounts of influence and power are concentrated?

I look forward to your replies @btang

Regards,

Furious

1 Like
23

I wanted to express my gratitude for your leadership, support for the ApeCoin DAO, and congratulations on your many accomplishments that you have done on behalf of the ApeCoin Foundation and DAO. Thank you so much.

We appreciate the information and advices you have shared in the AIP. I would fully embrace a shared and decentralized governance for ApeCoin DAO under your leadership and for ApeCoin DAO’s future success.

Since the ApeCoin DAO is pretty young, it needs time to grow, and develop from centralized governance model to more decentralized model. Do you have a roadmap or time frame how the ApeCoin DAO should look like 3 years from now or 5 years from today? Something that you can share with the ApeCoin community. Thank you

Special Council Candidate
Ken Forest

24

Thank you everyone for their comments, questions, and feedback. I will attempt to address a number of areas together in this response.

As mentioned above, the Initial Scope of DAO Operations included primarily one area: Managing the AIP governance process. This includes administering Discourse, administering Snapshot, preparing AIP Analysis Reports and AIP DAR Packages, and implementing changes to Snapshot & Discourse as per community feedback. The Expanded Scope of DAO Operations covers 5 areas. Cartan mobilised additional resources and put policies and procedures in place to operate those areas while protecting the Foundation and ApeCoin DAO as a whole.

Cartan administers the ApeCoin DAO governance process as per the published and community approved process. The community steers the ApeCoin DAO ecosystem, specifically,

  • Community members submit AIP Ideas
  • Community members engage and provide feedback to authors
  • Community members vote on Live AIPs

Cartan remains independent and unbiased in administering the process, specifically,

  • Cartan does not make recommendations or suggestions whether an AIP is good or bad
  • Cartan does not vote to approve an AIP for vote or return for reconstruction/clarification
  • Cartan does not participate in voting on Snapshot

It is up to the community to approve more proposals so we can make more grant payments, decide what projects or applications are funded to forge the ecosystem’s history, set forward-looking budgets to steer the community’s future roadmap, and over time achieve decentralisation based on this underpinning of projects, applications, and community.
If any community member believes to have identified a quicker, fairer, and/or quicker way to progress the DAO as well as decentralisation, please bring it forward to the community’s attention in the forum as it warrants the highest calibre discussion.

The Foundation’s official communication channels are Discourse, Twitter, Snapshot, and apecoin.com. While I understand some community members want decentralisation across the ecosystem and to add Discord, two separate proposals on this topic were also turned down by the community. Requests to add Discord to the Foundation’s operations will require even more additional resources from Cartan than anticipated in this AIP.

The ApeCoin Twitter is intended to publicly communicate advancements in the ecosystem and highlight projects that are building on or integrating ApeCoin into their projects. If a team or project wishes for a retweet, please reach out to us. Furthermore, we would be happy for the community to propose a fair and impartial policy on how this should occur and we would implement that policy similar to how we administer the published AIP governance process.

As evidenced by RedVulkan’s messages, and verified in in Dune dashboards by Cartan here, the amount of work continues to expand. Activity, users, AIP Ideas, Snapshot votes, and overall community engagement continues to grow. Each new grant agreement, proposal, election, regulatory discussion, or legal conversation creates more information to keep track of, more data to secure, and more payments to process. The volume of incoming requests continues to expand and as a result, the amount of resources needed to responsibly manage the work must expand as well.

If we are successful in being re-elected as the DAO’s administrators service provider, we will use most of the new resources to hire more team members. Many team members will come directly from the ApeCoin community and therefore, they will bring the same ideals we all already share directly into Cartan.

Our commitment to this DAO over the last 9 months has been unwavering. We want to see new tools and structures to further directly empower the community. We want nothing more than to continue working for the Foundation but we need to ensure that we can operate responsibly and provide the trusted administration service for each and every new twist and turn in this ever-evolving landscape.

We would not be interested in a short extension because we want to put our full force of energy and focus into doing what we’ve stated in this AIP. A longer extension at the Initial Scope (as proposed above) would put the Foundation at risk because administrative work would continue to grow and pose unforeseen risks to the Foundation.

4 Likes
25

Since it appears the intent is to leave the AIP idea unchanged, can you please clarify if the expectation is that Cartan will cease operations for the Foundation on 1/1/23 if this AIP fails to pass?

Alternatively, if the DAO is willing to accept the “unforeseen risks to the Foundation”, is Cartan willing to accept the 3-month extension previously proposed?

8 Likes
26

At the moment, the ApeCoin DAO has no other alternatives or options on the table that allows the ApeCoin DAO to continue its operations without passing.the AIP. Therefore, I would recommend that we start building the ApeCoin DAO leadership team during 2023, and create a join operations with the Gartan Group leadership team as a redundant backup leadership system in place similar to a IT network systems that won’t fail apart easily!

1 Like
27

Nice example on how to answer nothing with extremely vague reply.

2 Likes
28

We don’t have a lot of time to digest and approve a $180,000 per month increase in cost and commit to it for 12 months. I’m all for retaining Cartan as the operational team but this feels very rushed.

I would support a small extension (2 or 3 months) at existing rates, to give us time to consider and feedback on a 12 month expansion to take us into 2024.

12 Likes
29

Hey Balou,

Thanks for joining the forums. I had asked these existential questions as the first post to this AIP Idea.

And the more I’m reading and learning, both here and off-site, the more I’m leaning towards just renewing Cartan Group’s current contract for 2023 (6-mos min as these things always take longer than expected) - with the condition that the Special Council draft an AIP that lays out a transition process where the DAO is progressively onboarding members of the community to work in partnership with the legal entity - progressive decentralization.

The rest of this post is for the rest of the community in general:

Hard resets and last-minute negotiations over Discourse and Twitter generally do not turn out well.

We are one of the biggest DAOs with a sizeable treasury, and while I am all for transparency and accountability, it never ceases to amaze that we continue to be “Penny-wise and Pound-foolish”! (ye olde English saying)

Do we really think an ad-hoc group, or worse a small gang of influencers, will really protect us from SEC/CFTC/IRS probes or lawsuits? This is not a pfp project, YugaLabs, A16z and their legal counsel put the SC, Cartan Group and this DAO together in the first place - let’s at least give the BAYC founders that credit.

The next 3 weeks are going to be filled with Special Council Elections, and all the noise and disappointments they bring, and then immediately followed up with requests for communications and transparency with little time afforded for on-the-job training and transition - let’s not add switching out the group responsible for AIP admin, asset custody, accounting, invoicing, and the legal requirements to maintaining a Caymans Foundation to this tumultuous period.

If you’ve read this far, thanks for being part of the ApeCoin DAO in earnest. Happy to have these important conversations, but let’s agree to disagree without being disagreeable.

Cheers,
SSP :v:t4:

11 Likes
30

Yuga Labs LLC, Incorporated in the State of Delawere, USA. I personally think and believe ApeCoin DAO should be registered and incorporated as a legal entity in the USA in order grow and have permanent presence globally.

The ApeCoin Foundation is registered in Cayman Islands, which is fine, but the ApeCoin DAO should be compliant with regulations and law for its long term operations as a global DAO entity. I am willing to take the responsibility and work for that if I will be given the opportunity to have an assignment by the ApeCoin DAO.

1 Like
31

Fair enough, but I do think the vast majority of attorney’s in the USA have directed DAOs, especially ones with large treasuries and worldwide token-holders, to avoid incorporating in the USA until clearer regulations are set.

Not a lawyer but have sat in many meetings with legal counsel for NFT projects and DAOs.

FYI - Yuga Labs is not an LLC but a C-Corp – set-up for the ability to sell registered securities to accredited investors as recognized by the SEC. Lots of paperwork.

Thanks for your input.

3 Likes
32

I completely agree with this. It is precisely why I await @btang response to my questions because we cannot be confident that Cartan’s AIP, as it is presently written, will pass its vote. Therefore, we need to understand if Cartan has contingency plans or if it is going to force the DAO to come up with its own. In either case, the DAO needs to be informed as soon as possible.

@btang Please advise. Thanks

8 Likes
33

Appreciate and support this common-sense take on the situation at hand.

4 Likes
34

Appreciate your quick feedback! Yes, lots of paperwork and CPA / Lawyers meeting sessions. We are not experts, and so we must consult and work with those experts who specialized in this specific area, and get things moving forward and align with the ApeCoin DAO goal and objective. It will take times and lots of efforts!

1 Like
35

@btang a supporting table to compare and contrast Initial Scope and Expanded Scope, as @BoredApeG suggested, is absolutely necessary. I just reread your first post and it’s very difficult to discern which tasks and responsibilities are actually an expansion. For example:

Here you concisely document the Initial Scope:

The 2nd bullet reads “To act as a team of moderators, administrators, and lead in Discourse”

Then immediately below it you write:

Here in the 2nd bullet point you write “Acting as the team of moderators, administrators, and lead in Discourse”

It’s literally word-for-word the Initial Scope. There are many more instances related to operational support, project management, reports, etc. Communications seems like the only true expansion IMO. I hope that we can get you guys paid and that you can continue to service the DAO, but clarification is necessary.

On a separate note - I’d like to see Cartan push back and notify the DAO of scope creep. It’s not good for progress towards decentralization. There are members creating and proposing working groups, but when Cartan absorbs more roles, the less of a DAO this becomes.

To summarize my position: I support a 1-year extension of the Initial Scope. I wouldn’t support an Expanded Scope without itemization of the roles and responsibilities deemed “Expansion”.

6 Likes
36

I agree that when Cartan absorbs more roles, the less of a DAO this becomes.

Hi Matt, I definitely agree, and I am proposing all like-minded individuals who has demonstrated interest and integrity to serve the ApeCoin DAO. 44 Special Council candidates to form 4-5 working groups with 6-7 individuals and write few AIPs supporting each executive working groups.

I have read all the candidates profiles, and we have well diverse background of candidates with expertise knowledge in their fields including Accounting, Finance, Marketing, Operations Management, Strategic Planning, and DAO
Governance!!

Yes, I agreed 1-year extension of the initial scope, and I will vote in favor of the Cartan’s AIP as individual member. ApeCoin Token Holder, Ken

3 Likes
37

Hi All - completely understand and fully appreciate the candor of comments thus far. My two cents fwiw, pointing out that I currently am CFO for a bank with about 20 yrs experience in the finance industry.

Though Cartan is raising their fees by more than an insignificant amount, I actually think they were underpaid to date and the community got a very good deal……likely the reason for their proposal. Though Cartan certainly brings a lot more value, I’d conservatively compare their role to a fund administrator. Fund admins most commonly charge fees based on AUM, or in our case total value in the community which is circa $2 bil and growing.

Cartan’s proposed annual fee is about 20 basis points of the community’s value which is very reasonable when comparing against common fund admin fees charged in the fund industry.

I get it, there is “sticker shock” with the year over year increase but let’s keep it in context with recognition of how much value Cartan has brought and will continue to bring going fwd.

5 Likes
38

Welcome to the forums @RogerRabbit - glad to have you here.

And thanks for reminding us of The Cartan Group as a fund administrator. I should have looked at it that way too (sit on the board of a community foundation and our fees are based on Assets Under Management and grants awarded).

I wonder why The Cartan Group hasn’t framed things through that lens? It’s totally reasonable and accepted practice. Please reach out to them immediately!!:laughing:

Even if they charged 1% of AUM and 5-10% grants awarded, their new AIP request would be less. Huh.

Anyway, thanks for posting and for helping reframe the new contract – any chance of you tweeting about this? That’s where most candidates for SC and voters get their news.

Cheers
SSP✌🏽

PS - Shave and a haircut …

3 Likes
39

Thank you for chiming in. I value your perspective and think you raise a very valid point but I’d like to add that we are not a typical fund even if our costs may be comparable to one. I’m half way with you and Cartan on the merits of their ask and understand the need to ensure resource requirements are met. But with a caveat. We are a DAO with blockchain enabled tools at our disposal that traditional funds lack. Partly why DAOs even started! Our goal is to become increasingly decentralized, secure, efficient and cost effective especially in our governance and maintenance processes whether it is through more advanced voting mechanisms or trustless on chain administration enabled more by token holders and less by the equivalent of a centralized fund management company.

like yourself and many others I fully appreciate Cartan’s track record of contributing to DAO’s smooth running and administration. This is not to say we haven’t had our own fair share of challenges especially with some AIPs not going through “admin process” in a timely manner which is not entirely Cartan’s fault because often the perception has been that the delay has been on the Special Council side. In any case, we hope to have a more efficient and consistent workflow once new council members are elected plus a more transparent communication method between AIP authors, the council and the community. It would be nice to learn how Cartan’s offer to scale their activities will fill any of these gaps specifically. Others have mentioned before that a comparative table showing original vs scaled scope backed by data that warrants the need for scaling. I also think that would be a very helpful addition.

My suggestion would be for @btang and their team to author 2 AIPs. One to establish track record and confirm their commitment to the original scope of work, if that’s still the case! We would love some clarity on this as well.

The second AIP to include a proposal with additional scope, costed and itemised, that explains what has changed since the original AIP to warrant a more than double increase in fees, outlining how funds are allocated across their services. AIP-121 by @giacolmo.eth which was voted in by 100% of voter on snapshot has some useful guidelines on how to state costs and information about the team in a more transparent way. Would be great if Cartan could integrate some of these guidelines in their AIP draft. :handshake:

I’d also appreciate some thoughts on how Cartan will continue to support and enable decentralization of the DAO as we move forward. Id love to see concrete examples and a roadmap on how they see their role in a more decentralized Apecoin DAO.

Again for transparency reasons, the title of the AIP needs to reflect its nature which is an ask for a raise with an offer of additional services. This is not currently clear from the title. A more relevant title will be helpful to the wider community voting on snapshot.

Finally, I think allowing folks to vote on two AIPs will offer some clarity and reassurance. Also that a potential vote against the extended scope of work based on current presentation of costs is not necessarily construed as a vote of no confidence in Cartan’s valuable achievements and contributions to the DAO to date.

Thank you @btang and Cartan for your AIP idea and thanks to everyone else for your constructive contributions to this important discussion. :saluting_face:

6 Likes
40

Hi RogerRabbit

Welcome to the forums!

While I understand what you are attempting to get at, I do not believe fees based on AUM is an appropriate comparison here even as a ‘conservative’ comparison. Let’s dive in utilizing the figures from the Ape Foundation Transparency Report November 2022:

Most of the Ecosystem Fund is presently locked, meaning it would not be reasonable to include in an ‘AUM’ calculation. The fund is no where near $2B…

Total Unlocked Funds = 173,750,000 Unlocked + 3,198,334 Unclaimed APE
However, even then, the Year 1 budget “to manage” was only for 28,200,000 APE per AIP-3

So let’s say our starting point is:
31,398,334 (28,200,000 APE + 3,198,334 Unclaimed APE)
x $4 (keep it simple with the current price)
$125,593,336 USD ‘assets’ at $4/APE

$1,500,000 Cartan Fee ($150,000 x 10 months of March - December)

$1,500,000 / $125,593,336 USD = 1.19% “Management Fee”

Sure that present fee could sound reasonable for your position, but you then need to factor in that Cartan is not actively managing these funds for a return on investment. If we are going to look at it from an AUM point of view, then it would arguably be based on Cartan’s success in facilitating the disbursement of funds via approved AIPs.
Funds Allocated
181,267,624
(124,690) Normalize: Staking prociess which was already allocated for at inception
(175,000,000) Normalize: Staking funds which was already allocated for at inception
6,142,934 Total Funds allocated for ALL AIPs have have been passed
HOWEVER, most of those funds were from insider AIPs
(4,700,000) Guy Osery (launch partner and investor in Yuga labs, and none have been spent yet)
(1,000,000) Bug Bounty Program (relates to staking)
442,934 Meaning if you normalize for the above, it would be reasonable to connect that Cartan’s AIP involvement resulted in only 442,934 APE funded
67,500 Add: Let’s also give them Grants Approved by Special Council ($370,000USD / $4 APE)
510,434 TOTAL Funds allocated for ALL AIPs have have been passed
217,907 3.3.1 ADMINISTRATIVE FEES - These I believe are substantively Cartan Group
43% (217,907/510,434) Conclusion: Cartan’s fees are 43% of the amount of APE that has been funded by AIPs unrelated to the launch partners/already provided for at inception

Additionally, Ape Foundation also pays Coinbase Prime for custodial services which is presently accrued at 485,367 APE. This highlights that the majority of funds are held in custodial services, not ‘actively managed’ by Cartan - and those costs are not being factored in my above calculations.

All of the above is to illustrate that AUM is not appropriate; IMO it’s application would be more detrimental to Cartan’s case of comparing fees to ‘fund performance’ because barely any APE have been approved for spending via passed AIPs.

@ssp1111 please give me your thoughts as well on ^

Cartan does provide terrific value to the DAO, but it should really be seen as a service provider for specific contracted services. This is why we are trying to drill down on the specific services it wishes to provide in-scope currently or expanded at higher rates.

Getting to the meat of all this…Cartan’s present AIP has an underlying assumption that it needs to scale its services because the DAO/its members are not expected to change its behavior (i.e. we are going to be forever useless in presenting AIPs to operationalize the DAO, we will never implement working groups, etc.)

However, we are in the middle of elections and the general sentiment is that the DAO will be operationalizing over the next couple of months. The DAO is simply looking for more time instead of committing to 12-months at 2x service costs when we have not even completed our first election yet!

If in the next 2/3 months the DAO can’t get it’s act together by electing appropriate new Special Council members and starting to make moves towards decentralization, then sure, Cartan might as well run the entire DAO :frowning: :slight_smile: However, all one has to do is look no further than the passionate members replying in this thread - a shift/help is evidently coming and we hope Cartan can come to a reasonable understanding on what it wishes to do as we get through this election. The DAO can certainly come to an agreement on something that makes economic sense for Cartan, but it is doubtful to be this AIP, as it is written, if asked to be voted on within the next few weeks.

10 Likes
41

Agreed with Novo here. Although legacy institutions are a fair place to start thinking about baseline operations and costs, they cannot be the endpoint. We are looking for new structures. @RogerRabbit, I personally think it would be awesome to put your expertise to determining how we might create a more decentralized yet sustainable structure instead of using that expertise to justify legacy mores.

Not to mention if Cartan is the DAO admin expert here, they have the most knowledge about how much stuff costs. Sticker shock shouldn’t even have been a potential outcome, unless…

this whole thing is new, and they are feeling their way through the darkness just as much as anyone else (which means overreliance on them is a mistake!)!

4 Likes