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

Final AIPs Rejected AIPs
42

Just some thoughts and couple questions:

Would it be a good idea that the ApeCoin Leadership Team initiates to have a face-to-face meeting session with Cartan Leadership Team, and to clarify some of services in Cartan’s AIP?

Also, to what extent the ApeCoin DAO can independently operate and collaborate with Cartan’s as a service provider?

Can some of the service items be programmed on the smart contract as the way to decentralize the decision making process and reduce the Cartan’s administrative overhead?

“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.”

Yeah, I can understand that there is such assumption in Cartan’s present AIP, and that’s one of the reasons, I am proposing that ApeCoin DAO can start thinking, brainstorming, forming some executive working groups, and eventually decrease the reliance on centralized governance such as Cartan group or any other service providers.

Maybe negotiate the extension for another 6 months (halfway), and itemize the cost of service items per accounting standard practices.

1 Like
43

I actually agree with Cartan on this point! There will never be any scenario where anything close to a majority of people with the ability to participate in a democratic state will be motivated to actually participate to the level that is required for true democracy.

However, governments (Cartan in this case) always think the response to that scenario is more centralization and a wider scope of duties. Nope! The better solution is a public-facing working group that leads the DAO towards building smart contracts that eventually take over the group’s duties.

We’ll see if the DAO eventually gets to this or votes for Cartan’s AIP. Will be interesting to see either way.

4 Likes
44

Hi All
Cartan have spelt out a pretty extensive list of what they have accomplished and I think most of us are of the view that the DAO would not be in the shape it is without their support - they do have a proven track record in an emerging industry, which can be challenging to learn and navigate. I do think that there are a lot of great thoughts and questions in this thread about what our objectives and needs are in this space, such as:

  • progressively decentralise the operations of the DAO and a roadmap to do so
  • offering/advertising new scope of services to existing and interested DAO members
  • allowing the special council elections to take place
  • what is the appropriate amount of $APE compensation for aligned objectives (particularly on extended scope of services)

Given the timeframes involved and the level of service Cartan have provided but the uncertainty over the extended scope and its associated rate card/effort. I think it would help if Cartan puts up 2 proposals:

  1. For a 12 month extension of the current scope of services: I would expect this will include some increase of in expenditure for the increased workload but this should be justified by time & materials type calculations.
  2. For extended services: this should be quite detailed including a break down of the scope and each service should be itemised explaining the scope, frequency and deliverables along with costs and resourcing. It would also be great to have Cartan’s best practice view on the roadmap to decentralied DAO operations and admin as a service within this scope

I think Cartan have done a great job and we should continue the current scope of service with allowance for increased costs where it can be justified with workload/effort calculations but given the current direction of the DAO and the timelines associated with the renewal, I believe it is impractical to bundle the expanded scope with the renewal. This approach would ensure that the services we need can continue, that Cartan can resource up and be appropriately compensated and that the DAO can selectively (or in its entirety) engage Cartan for extended services on a longer term journey to decentralisation.
Thanks
St01c

3 Likes
45

Random Thoughts in no particular order:
Totally agree with most all of the points made above by you, Novo, Mantis, Stoic, etc. And while the nitty-gritty of the details are proving to be contentious, I just wanted to highlight to the community that there are other lenses in which to view Cartan’s proposal.

Yes, TCG is not a traditional Fund Administrator, but I do think @RogerRabbit has presented a compensation path to consider that is tied more to Assets Under Management and Grants Awarded over a General Service Agreement.

True, TradFi AUM metrics are NOT the same here, as TCG does not manage these tokens, but perhaps the “Assets” under management could be the AIPs, the operations of the DAO, the RISK Management, etc (most likely shielding all members of the DAO from the gray areas of the law) :thinking:.

By the way, most community foundations (at least in the US) do not actually manage funds directly, they use third-party fund managers yet still charge a management fee to their donors/clients. But I digress.

Decentralization?
With a handful of outliers notwithstanding, the community has proved itself to be uninterested in decentralization since launch (9 months). Basically leaving it to the Special Council and TCG to keep things going. I’m glad to see more conversations taking place towards that end goal, but I also believe it’ll take the better part of 2023 to get us back on that path – remember, many candidates with their own priorities, many whales with their own agendas, many members still not engaged.

The Cartan Group?
I’ve read a few comments, posts and Twitter threads where the next move is to vote NO on Cartan Group’s AIP, get rid of them and “we” can do better. Really?

I appreciate Novo’s call for 2 AIPs to vote on – I also imagine the community voting NO on any AIP with increased costs, only voting YES to Cartan Group if for a limited period and then spending the next 3-6 months trying to figure out which “Working Group” will takeover a Cayman Island’s responsibilities, how much each “officer” will deserve to get paid, what processes to nominate and elect these officers should we embrace, etc., etc.

Yep, this:

Summary
We’ve all heard the nauseating advice every VC doles out to every startup founder:

“Gonna take twice as long and cost twice as much”

In practice, it’s not that far from the truth, especially for those that have never founded a company or have had any experience running a startup.

During the next few weeks, I’d like the community to realize what’s in store on the macro-side of this debate, rather than continuously focusing on the micro, which we will tackle together as we get past the elections.

So yes, vote for keeping Cartan Group in place until we can get our own sh*t in order – oops, sorry for that, don’t usually say that :laughing:. The question is one or two AIPs and will The Cartan Group react to the community’s feedback or not?

Cheers
SSP :v:t4:

5 Likes
46

Well, you absolutely took my quote out of context and did the exact same thing I warned against in my actual statement:

This is my follow-through to the above-above statement, which means the Cartan AIP in its current form does not get my vote. I just want to make that clear for anyone reading this thread.

4 Likes
47

I appreciate everyone’s thoughts and points of view here. I started typing out a response and it turned into a pretty big document so I turned it into an Open Letter (maybe I wrote to much, lol) and posted it in General An Open Letter from bc

Quick note: I did not notice this basis points of AUM note above before I wrote the letter. I do not agree Cartan should be charging bps on assets because we do not make asset allocation decisions. But I appreciate the thinking behind the idea and would be happy to answer any questions from a fund admin perspective (having a lot of experience in that industry

bc

6 Likes
48

I wanted to provide some background and additional clarity on this AIP.

  • We have already agreed to a 3-month extension on the current terms in AIP-113
  • An extension of 3-months is the same as an extension for 1 year or any other longer timeframe; at any point after 3 months, the community can propose a new AIP to replace Cartan
  • The Extended Scope of DAO Operations (5 areas) is inclusive of the Initial Scope (1 area); nonetheless, at a minimum, it is 4x greater than the Initial Scope
  • Any discussion of the “current service level” or its extension should be clear that that is the Extended Scope of DAO Operations, not the Initial Scope. We have been performing these functions since almost the very beginning when it became evident we needed to take them on. The cost proposed in this AIP adjusts for what we have already been doing as well as budgets for the inevitable additional resources we’ll need as each area increases in magnitude (by multiple fold)
  • Every AIP, from submission as an AIP Idea to its funding or implementation, has at least 50 action steps (in the most simplest scenario), such as something as small as confirming to the author that the response has been received, to preparing a 10-page or more AIP Analysis Report, to working with legal counsel to execute the grant agreement. The community is and will continue to grow and propose more and more AIPs, so naturally, we need more resources to keep up with the community.
3 Likes
49

Appreciate this take. Cartan does great work and has acted as a responsible and trusted steward of the DAO.

While the ask is an increase, allowing cooler heads to prevail, taking adequate time to digest and determine the reasoning around the increased ask, and ultimately coming to a consensus around the best path forward that supports the highest probability of the DAO’s long-term health needs to remain the core focus.

3 Likes
50

I just wanted to say my piece on this generally for our community to digest…simply having more and more AIPs here is not our goal. Quality > Quantity

It is not about Ape Foundation expending resources in the future to facilitate much more AIPs, 90%+ of which have no chance at passing a DAO vote. As a DAO, we need to and will become better at signaling to the broader ApeCoin community our preferences for AIPs. It’s why I also feel there is such a disconnect on this AIP - it’s as if our expectation is to continue the low approval rate of AIPs.

We want Cartan to be spending their efforts on AIPs that will have a reasonable chance at passing.

This highlights exactly why the problem to tackle is the quality of AIPs from the onset.

6 Likes
51

Hi Alex,

2 factors:

  1. Because of the double increase in spending being asked by Cartan, IMO, it is justified and rationale for the ApeCoin community leadership members who have the duties and responsibilities on behalf the ApeCoin DAO to ask Cartan to provide S-M-A-R-T goals: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound. "

Btang: “The community is and will continue to grow and propose more and more AIPs, so naturally, we need more resources to keep up with the community.”

" may sound like a rationale goal for a Cartan, but it doesn’t really meet the S-M-A-R-T criteria from many ApeCoin community leaders’ perspective.

  1. If Cartan could set some specific strategies and directions for the ApeCoin DAO, that Cartan would like to achieve with the increase fees being asked, that could help the ApeCoin leadership team to justify their votes.

IMO,
Special Council Candidate
Ken Forest

2 Likes
52

Hi Brian,

Thank you for the report, it’s great to see some financial transparency here.

Looking for some clarification around Section 3.3.5 Grant Expenses. As you stated in the report:

“Pursuant to AIP-121, the Foundation was directed to implement reporting showing APE allocation containing “total funds committed and payment of funds up to date, with detail for each AIP (number and title)”. These details are included in table 3.”

Can you please explain why you left the three AIPs (1, 3, 113) out of the Grant Expenses section? Feels pretty arbitrary to not include the grants that were specifically allocating funds to Cartan in this section.

Also, for clarity’s sake did Messari, Inc:

  1. Have any hand in preparing the transparency report you provided?
  2. Where is the Q3 2022 report from Messari?
  3. What is Messari’s relationship with Cartan?

Thank you

6 Likes
53

Hi @badteeth, happy to provide some clarifications:

  • AIPs 1 and 113 are captured under expenses as these are services performed or engaged with the Foundation. Grant expenses are considered as grants or projects to other teams.
  • There is a budget section that compares actual expenses against budgeted projects as per AIP-3. Otherwise, there are no costs or expenses related to AIP-3.

Let me know if I have misunderstood the questions above.

Regarding the subsequent questions on Messari:

  • Messari was not involved in preparing the transparency report. We have 4 CPAs and 3 CFAs on our team that applied industry best accounting practices to prepare this unique and custom report for the community.
  • Here is the Q3 2022 from Messari: State of ApeCoin Q3 2022
  • There is no relationship between Messari and Cartan. The Special Council may approve activities outside of the AIP process, so long as such activities do not contradict the terms of any AIP approved by ApeCoin DAO members or the Foundation’s statutory documents. Any further questions or queries should be directed to the Council.
2 Likes
54

Hi @btang,

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.

-Pearson

1 Like
55

I’d like to proceed to the draft phase

2 Likes
56

This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.

57

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.

-Pearson

1 Like
58

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.

Kind Regards,

-Pearson

1 Like
60

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

After review, this Topic submitted by @btang is ready for vote. The proposal will be posted on Snapshot at the next weekly release, which is every Thursday at 9PM ET.

Kind Regards,

-Pearson

1 Like
61

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

The voting has closed for this proposal and it has not been accepted.

This Topic will be moved to and remain in the Reject AIPs subcategory.

-moonkt

3 Likes