Indeed. As I mentioned in my other AIP, I had no idea that you were actually doing so much work behind-the-scenes. This is data that the DAO needs; and so, in very much the same way that the Foundation hires attorneys, accountants and a variety of other service providers without an AIP, I don’t see why they can’t engage you to do this work. Which is precisely why my proposal puts the onus on the administrative team to get this done.
I suggest that you engage them with now in this regard. Then, between you and membrains team at Nodeblocks, we can get it done efficiently.
Note: as part the Q&A during admin review, I was asked if the Nodeblocks team had agreed to do the work, and if so, they would require a new contract for specifically this. To which I responded that I had in fact been in touch with memebrains team who have agreed to do the dashboard work. So, I believe that your efforts would also fall under the same guidance in that the Foundation would be funding both aspects. tbh, I have no idea why I even needed to write a proposal to do this; but here we are.
Overall on NodeBlocks side, if we can be provided with that single source data point we can automate its display on the treasury dashboard via API. So if there are commitments from other people as needed to provide this, then we are in.
I would of course like to look at the final data point format and any other details which may pop-up while it’s being created to see if there needs to be a scope and a contract price added to it or not.
Either way I would imagine we need formal approval by the foundation prior to making any changes on the existing dashboard, and that they would want to see the data points, the methodology, and to see the design change mock ups etc. first before providing that authority.
Agreed. However, having responded to the admin review, I believe that the next steps would be to wait for the disposition of the proposal after voting. If it fails, my guess is that will be the end of it. Which is rather ridiculous to me that we have to spend all this time and effort via a proposal just to add a data point to a dashboard. It’s just ridiculously time-wasting and inefficient.
NOTE: The below is not related to this AIP idea, just the speed of implementation of this good business idea…….
I agree, surely the foundation has some powers to action ideas that increase transparency at no cost to anyone. Same for AIP508 that is asking the foundation to release quarterly reports. This is just good business.
Processes will always need fine tuning and adapt to business change, so putting in place a better runway to facilitate this type of idea is really needed. We just put 100m in the banana bill for this very reason; that AIP’s take too long for business decisions.
My suggestion would be that they are fast tracked once the foundation has finished asking questions to the author. The community is given two days to object by reply, otherwise it’s put through to implementation without vote. If the foundation is not content after questioning; they can object and it goes to public vote, If someone else objects, it goes for public vote. If someone wants to object after the two days has lapsed, they have to put in an AIP (that has to go to public vote) to have the original withdrawn.
This would cut the time down to about 2weeks. 7day public consultation on the idea, 5days for the foundation to ask questions, 2days for no objections. Obviously the foundation may have more lengthy questions that push the time out but it will still be much quicker than public voting.
I agree. That’s literally an AIP waiting to be written.
Below are some of the ridonkulous operations related proposals (7 out of 18) I have had to author since June because there’s no other way to obtaining this data/info, let alone a way to get GwG or SC to action anything outside of having to write a proposal, then wait upwards of 6-7 weeks for it to go up for vote - and in some random order.
Why go through all that? Because we have absolutely no feasible way of doing anything around here without going through a time-consuming process whereby there are more questions than there are answers. To wit: The phase after Admin Review
AGREE!
Through this proactive approach to financial transparency, we aim to reinforce the DAO’s resilience, enhance stakeholder trust, and ensure that our collective resources are managed with the utmost responsibility.
