AIP-317: ApeCoin DAO Governance and Operations Budget

Generally excellent work. I have one question or concern. With these rotating so regularly will this lead to very short term directives as anything long term they are likely to be already out of the seat. Also how to pick which rotate? By schedule or by a vote? If a vote then a vote by who?


Thanks for the visuals Buuvei.

Staying tuned for Edit 2.

SSP :call_me_hand:t4:


Second time reading through and just a few questions:

  • So we’re changing the fonts and colours for the ApeCoin brand from ApeCoin Blue to Light Purple? I kinda like it, but it seems like this would be a Marketing & Communications Working Group deliverable, so just intrigued to better understand how far and wide GovtWG mandate runs.
  • Still awaiting this OKR before August Funding (or is this now cancelled?):


We were planning for RFP transparency when engaging professional service providers in the MarComms WG, will you be doing same? Not that I care either way, but others may.

So are these committees replacing the Assembly? If so, what purpose will the Assembly serve if any?

So just to understand better, we weren’t happy that 30-40 members spoke for the DAO, but we’re okay with 7? Or is this just another layer of committees, meetings, minutes, etc?


  • What’s the breakdown for the $24k for Discord Mods?

  • $3k a month for communications? Isn’t this part of the Stewards responsibilities anyway?

  • $5k a month for reserve and additional comms - is that communications or committees?

  • Is the GovtWG still administering the elections (no mention of this)?

  • Please confirm if these are correct:
    – elections for 4 positions beginning September (MarComms & Metaverse)
    – elections for 3 positions beginning November (SC)
    – elections for 2 positions beginning December (MarComms & Metaverse)

  • Do you foresee any more?

Finally, with this budget for Governance we’re going from an annual budget of $1.8m for our previous admin to an annual expense of $2.27m – what’s the justification of increasing our Governance spend?

Sure, our ops have improved and our AIPs are processing faster, yet it seems to me that would be down to the 3 facilitators expediting matters and our 5 Special Council members working 20-40 hours per week as compared to their predecessors supposedly spending 3 hours per week/month = just more hours spent on the workloads.

(Also, improved communications thanks to Vulkan, ApeComms, SC, et al)

I’m not sure many members realize this comparative increase, and I imagine there are nuances, but it would be worth letting the community know.


SSP :call_me_hand:t4:


As a follow-up:

April 13 - Working Group AIPs 245 & 246 published
Jun 7 - Metaverse WG approved
July 19 - Marketing & Communications WG approved

Sept/Oct - Expected Elections for WG Stewards

1 Like

Thank you dyorjdr! And for sending over the French translation!!

We actually had five ready to go but caught an error on one that kept popping up every time we reran it so didn’t want to risk anything in case there were more in others.

Should have that posted up today!

Hey Leyota! Great questions!! Moving into the legal structure that we’re transitioning into, committees won’t require an AIP unless we determine a specific ability to task them with that would transcend a previous AIP, or look to establish them as something which would require a future AIP to change.

But we do want to budget for them accordingly :pray:

This is a great catch… Putting this in our notes now to adjust. I’m with you 100% after rereading it. Thanks for the insights!!



These are great questions BigBull, and definitely on an evolving item… The positives of having terms would be to establish some longer-term thinking, but we don’t want it to feel gate-kept either, so the thinking was to provide more opportunities; albeit even if those term concepts aren’t right where they need to be just yet.

Any suggestions? Would love to get your take on this…


I’ve just noted the LLC. This concerns me a bit. Why would anyone set up any structure related to crypto in the US, one of the most crypto unfriendly nations in the world, especially when the Ape Foundation itself rather set up in the Cayman Islands and the DAO operates globally? Or are you just using the US description, although not necessarily planned for the US?

I asked this question when asked about the draft AIP. Seems Marshall Islands also use the term LLC or this case DAO LLC.

Exploring The Marshall Islands DAO LLC: A Revolutionary DAO Legal Structure - Marine/ Shipping - Marshall Islands.


Ok, looks like correct term for company there is then actually just ‘Ltd’., but I was looking for the country, so Marshall Islands it is then. But the DAO there strangely also uses the US company term of LLC at the end thereof. Thanks for the link.

1 Like

Great work on providing clarity & transparency in this budget. The level of detail effectively demonstrates how the budget line items will lead to qualitative results.

As the general AIPs serve to support the Web3 ecosystem at large, the Working Groups have a signficant role of serving the ApeCoin DAO itself. I’m excited to see this budget jumpstart that process.


I absolutely love the UI design of the mobile app and the redesigned ApeCoin website as well. The visuals are captivating and I can’t wait to see it come to life. LFG !!:mechanical_arm: :new_moon:


I’m excited to see such strategic planning in action. This proposal seems to be a major step towards creating a more efficient, transparent, and inclusive DAO environment. Definitely keeping a track on this. I look forward to the positive impact that this AIP could bring to the DAO. :crossed_fingers:t5:


Thank you apboatt!! And as for the website and mobile app development, these were created strictly so that we could show the community what a fresh feel could look like, and the vibes those could evoke :smiling_face:

Thank you Justin!! Means a lot!!!



Update on the polls!!

1 Like

GM Everyone!

We’re making some updates to the proposal based off community feedback, then I will address all the open questions in the forum. :slight_smile: I don’t want anyone to think they’re being ignored! :pray: :blue_heart:



The priority should be to enhance the website by improving its use cases and structure before we begin developing the phone apps. The website currently requires significant improvements. Launching an app with the website’s current framework would not only be a waste of resources but would also necessitate a larger budget for subsequent modifications.

I would be glad to help with this.

quick sample I made a few months ago
that highlight few potential features and reason for people to use our site and bookmark it even!


Overall, great job on the proposal! I love the graphics and chart for the budget. It’s very clean and easy to read.

I’m looking forward to your response to @SmartAPE and @ssp1111. They asked some great questions. And @Halina.eth did as well. I do have some questions/comments also. Sorry there’s a lot, but there’s a lot in this proposal. And I see that you are going to be updating the proposal, so if some of my questions are no longer relevant, please ignore.

I very much appreciate you striving towards towards being the gold standard! Thank you for blazing the trail! I know it’s not easy!

  • How do you plan to make the process transparent?
  • How will you be deciding which 3rd parties to use, especially in regards to the “right professional service providers and advisors” who mentor you?
  • Could you please clarify your plans for the Ape Assembly, how it will operate, and it’s structure since it seems as that is no longer being decided by the AA members and the Governance Stewards have put forth Enable DAO-Wide Voting to Elect Working Group Stewards which would take away most of it’s mandate?
  • How would the Ape Assembly improvement fund be utilized?

Love these! :clap:

While this is something I personally think the DAO should pursue, this seems like something a Treasury Working Group would do.

  • What is the reasoning for having this go through the Governance Working Group?
  • While this is an interesting idea, could you explain why this would fall under the Governance Working Group to do? It seems like it should be it’s own AIP or fall under Marketing/Comms.
  • Could there end up being preferential treatment to NFT holders of certain collections? One Ape = One Ape
  • How is this different from what recently voted down AIP-247 was looking to do?

  • How does the Marketing & Communications Working Group fit into this? While I love the look of your example, it does seem, like @ssp1111 mentioned, that it would be a Marketing/Comms deliverable, especially since they will be handling branding.

  • How would you distinguish between an increase in traffic due to the mobile app vs. other activities? Especially since the Marketing/Comms Working Group should be up an running before the OKR is measured, and other initiatives and community members also drive traffic there.
  • What types of actionable insights will this group be putting forth?
  • How will it be decided who is in these seats?
  • How will it be decided who’s seats are going to be rotated? Rotation of at least 50% of the seats every two months seems too fast and that it’ll be hard for that group to have productive conversations or get anything accomplished with that high of turnover so frequently

Thanks for all your hard work on this! I look forward to your reply.


Thanks for taking a look. Made update with Edit 2.

Edit 3 will have to be after the proposal update like Amplify wrote above.


Hi AA!

On mobile right now so tricky to go through everything point by point, and would like to give Amplify the opportunity to reply.

But that being said, from a personal perspective, we have the opportunity to get the ball rolling — now. The DAO has been in a perpetual motion of waiting for others to execute things that they may or may not do. We’re here to get things moving, and not waste time as tomorrow is never guaranteed, like the Treasury Working Group vote showed. There are also no guarantees that the anticipated Marketing and Communications budget will pass, which is still months away from even being proposed; or who those Stewards will even be.

Overall, we want to provide support for these groups and push the DAO forward in bold, meaningful ways. And the time is now.

Hope that helps from a top-view perspective! And as always I appreciate and value your voice!!



Hey SSP! Just reaching out to say, a lot of these points and feedback are being taken into account and will reflect in the final draft of the proposal, so it wouldn’t serve to clarify much if I answered all of them.

  • The Assembly hasn’t been ratified yet, correct. Until we have our entity established.
  • We planned for an RFP process for producing the Sustainability study, but it’s not likely we will be publicly running RFPs for all our service providers.
  • The Assembly is still a larger think tank of highly active governance contributors. There’s a fairly long list I sent early in the Assembly channel of things that we can and should still be doing.

Recognizing the proposal will be edited and comments closed, I’m looking forward to answering any additional questions you may have about the updated one in the Discord or on ApeComms Monday spaces! :slight_smile:


1 Like