AIP-508: Update AIP Tracking Data

[LiveFast9986]

Note: I am not here to defend, be difficult, or have any malice intent towards your idea or you comments. Just want to share my opinion as best as I can with my own take (which very well can be wrong).

@SmartAPE

It wasn’t an issue for the previous secretary who did it quite well - and who used the tools that he wanted to use and which worked just fine. What’s your point, exactly?

Well, your AIP is stating this:

@SmartAPE

Within 7 days of this proposal passing, the DAO secretary is directed to update the aforementioned AIP tracking reports to include any/all missing AIP data.

I just wanted to point out that these tools kind of suck because they are more manually driven and I believe that while the data is important, maybe we shouldn’t hold ourselves to this specific tool, but rather being able to provide the data.

@SmartAPE

And I am all but certain that you have zero insight into tasks that the secretary is involved with and which would somehow be disrupted as a result of updating tables. It’s not rocket science. Aside from the fact that this sort of data collation is well within the purview and mandate of the secretary position. If you don’t think so, please explain what functions you see the secretary role performing if not this.

I’m not fully entrenched with his day-to-day, but my argument towards that this was a gift is Vulkan is based on the the fact that the Bulletin Board isn’t run by the GWG and was part of his own personal newsletter.

As for the milestone and follow-up system, we do have the AIP Execution and Transparency - ApeCoin DAO and Implemented AIPs - ApeCoin DAO which also act as alternatives to the AirTable data, with the tag feature on discourse being utilized a bit more to help with this type of issue.

@SmartAPE

Will you be building it, then? And will it be as clear and efficient as the treasury dashboard?

I am and I like to believe it will be.

@SmartAPE

And it needs to be maintained by the DAO. Not volunteers. The DAO.

I agree but also slightly disagree in that if its volunteer then there can provide unbiased opinions about it and give it more transparency, but it is an incredibly undertaking given the scale of the DAO so having the DAO compensate for it is really helpful.

@SmartAPE

Nobody knew about it until you posted that. And you didn’t create a thread which we could chat in and opine on it. If you had, though I would still have written this proposal, at least I would know that you were secretly building a better mouse trap which you hope to unveil - one day.

This is very valid criticism, and it wasn’t out of malice or anything. I made a few comments in the discord general chat about working on this, and it was even mentioned in the GWG x Livefast Historical AIP Voting Analysis With Alternate Strategies that we are looking at this. But you are right, I didn’t and I could/should have. Also, didn’t we converse in DM that I was doing this? If not, my apologies.

@SmartAPE

And you said had applied for a GwG grant to build it - and to be paid for doing so. What’s the issue, then? Is it because if the secretary were to continue doing this then there would be no need to pay you to do it?

Not really an issue, more of just waiting to see if it’s accepted. One of the questions on the application is what happens if I don’t get the grant. Which is basically that I will continue to build it out at my leisure.

If the secretary wanted to take on all of this, then by all means they can. Speaking from experience, it is an incredible time-sink and its a lot of information and data, but they are more than welcome to it. I just think that as someone who has worked on getting and doing something similar, it was worth mention the possibility of just delegating this out.

I think I addressed everything, please let me know if I missed something or if there was anything i need to clarify.

All the best.