Ape Assembly Meeting #7 Agenda

GM Ape Assembly!

Our first Ape Assembly meeting of the month is this week and we’re excited to see you all there!

Date/Time: 6 September 2023 2023-09-06T14:30:00Z (Will adjust to your local time)

Duration: 1 hour

Location: Ape Assembly Discord Stage

Set Reminder: Discord

Ape Assembly Meeting #7 Agenda

1. Introduction and Setting the Stage (5 minutes)

  • Welcome and Greetings
  • Purpose of the Meeting
  • Agenda Overview

2. Snapshot Discussion (50 minutes)

  • Do we allow for an abstain option on Ape Assembly snapshot?
  • What is the max amount of Ape Assembly proposals that can go to snapshot in a 2 week cycle?
  • Do we create a new read-only channel in Discord to publish upcoming AA snapshots using snapshot bot?
  • Should we use a template for all AA snapshot proposals?
  • Do we want the Governance Working Group Stewards to write guidelines for the AA after the DAO LLC has been established?

3. Wrap-Up and Scheduling Next Call (5 minutes)

  • Summary of Key Takeaways
  • Action Items and Responsible Parties
  • Confirm Date and Time for the Next Meeting
  • Any Additional Questions or Comments

Link to event which will be held on the Stage of apecoindao Discord server:


Please go and vote.

Do we allow for an abstain option on the Ape Assembly snapshot?

What is the maximum amount of Ape Assembly proposals that can go to Snapshot in a 2 week cycle?

Do we create a new read-only channel in Discord to publish upcoming Ape Assembly Snapshot votes using the existing AIP bot?

Should we use a template for all Ape Assembly Snapshot proposals?


Good to see the GWG working on the proposals that passed. I think the titles should start with a number so easier to look up later.

Something easy and makes sense like CAP-001 etc - Community Ape Proposal for example.

AAP could be used but doesn’t role off the tongue and is a bit too close to AIP.

Thoughts from the community?


Snapshots to discuss.

FYI - These would not be going up this week, as we have a cycle every two weeks.

• Do we keep the minimum 72 hour voting timeframe or change to 48hr minimum?
• Upgrade functionality of AA Proof Of Personhood
• Set Up A Vision Board For the AA
• Election of the DAO Secretary
• Create role in Discord and Badge in Discourse for AIP Accepted
• Election process for Working Group Stewards

They all have discussion areas in the apecoin discord:

Community can also comment here.


@adventurousape what do you think about the post above?


Are these things you want to put up for vote?

I don’t understand the need to change this if you can only put up 6 things every two weeks. I don’t think one day makes a big difference.

I don’t understand what this means. How does it relate to what the Gov Stewards are doing to strenthen proof of personhood in the AA?

I don’t think this is something that needs to be voted on. Just do it and involve the AA in what should be on it.

Per AIP-239 the AA is responsible for determining the term limits of the DAO secretary and electing a new one. I think discussing the term limit should be before the elections.

The Discord is not official, it’s a community run discord. I would first ask if that role could be added and don’t think this is something that would need to go to vote. For Discourse, I think an AIP would need to be written, like they just did for the Beta Testing group.

Need more details on this. The Gov Stewards already put forth a plan.


It actually was created in WG0 which evolved into Ape Assembly as stated in a Dao wide apecoin.eth snapshot vote.

Somethings to clarify are

  1. Where is it actually sitting now based on AIPs?
  2. Then think where would be the best place for it to sit legally and who should operate it.

Here is some factual information

  1. WG0 evolved into the Ape Assembly as stated in the AIP-239.
    AIP-239: Working Group Guidelines & The Governance Working Group Charter

  2. WG0 with Bored Security created the Discord as shown here.
    WG0 Discord -> ApeCoin DAO Discord
    This is not a passed AIP, but information showing the name change from Wg0 to apecoindao Discord.

  3. It has been suggested (after AIP-239 passed in an AIP) that the Discord should goto Marcomms in the future. However, this is purely a suggestion and not the will of the DAO.
    AIP-196: BORED AIP: Working Group Zero Stewards Final Report

So based on this it seems that the Discord comes under the Ape Assembly which will once setup (DAO LLC) be under the legal umbrella of the Governance Working Group.


You think it should follow a 12 month term, with the ability to get re-elected with a maximum of 2 terms?

What do you suggest?


Administrative positions like the secretary do not often need maximum term limits, especially as short as 2 terms. If you wanted to impose a maximum I’d suggest 10 or 12 terms. But I would not impose a maximum number of term limits on the DAO secretary position.


My personal opinion if someone is performing I don’t see the need for such short limits.

It is important to distinguish between re-election schedule versus overall limits for the various roles.


I agree - so let’s not say there will be a maximum number of terms someone can serve as DAO secretary. If someone is performing well, there is no reason to stop them from proceeding if the people repeatedly vote them into the position.

As for the DAO secretary election schedule, I’m agreed on the 12 month term. That is long enough to get something done after spending some time getting bearings on what the role requires.


Fully agree with @bigbull and @dar : no need for a setting a max limit for terms for such positions. 12 months sounds good as well, 18 would also work well imo

The Discord was created by the WG0 Stewards to use for WG0, WG0 itself did not oversee it, the Stewards did. We opened it up to all members with 1 $ape during that time, so it had grown quite a bit by the end of our term. When WG0 was dissolved, we thought rather than shut down the discord, we’d keep it going and pass it off to a working group, most likely Marketing/Comms. There was never any discussion about it being under the Ape Assembly.

I do agree that there needs to be better clarity in where it sits legally and who should operate it.

1 Like

I think that’s something that should be voted on in the AA with various options. I also agree with @dar that since it’s an administrative position, it might not a need maximum term limit. That could be something that’s voted on as well.

1 Like

I appreciate your comments but the fact remains that AIP-239 has an attachment which passed in a DAO wide AIP and the creator of this AIP was also part of WG0. It stated:

It creates the Ape Assembly, an evolution of Working Group Zero that allows high context DAO members…

This was not removed by the Special Council at the Administrative Review phase. Therefore WG0 did not dissolve but it evolved into the Ape Assembly.

Personally, I think the AA should vote on where the Discord will sit legally in the future and also who will be operating it going forward. This can be two different parties.

I appreciate your comments as well, but have to disagree here.
That statement came from the FAQ section:

But the Discord was created by the Stewards of WG0, it was not a part of or mentioned in AIP-239, it’s attachments, nor was it mentioned in AIP-196: B.O.R.E.D. AIP which created WG0.

WG0 itself never had control or say over the Discord. The Stewards did. Therefore, even if the Ape Assembly is considered an evolution of WG0, it does not give the AA rights over the discord imo.


Btw the attachment name and title was and is:

Phase 1 WG0 AIP FAQ

It is called WG0 faq and not ape assembly faq.

Thanks for these clarifications.

We also can’t force whomever owns / controls the Discord server to hand it over, if that’s an issue, just like it isn’t up to us to decide “where something sits legally” (that’s up to lawmakers and court judges, unless I misunderstand the phrase in this context).

There’s no clarity or certainty on what “meaningfully involved in the decisions…” means. Arguably the only ones “meaningfully involved in the decisions” are whales and large voting delegations since they’re the ones actually making the decisions a very high percentage of the time, while the rest of the DAO does the leg work of setting up what they’ll be voting / deciding on.


Being the owner from a technical sense doesn’t mean someone is the owner from a legal sense.

This issue needs to be addressed, even WG0 summary in their summary (not voted on by the dao) suggests it should goto marcomms in the future.

Also the AIP-239 which the scope includes the working group guidelines AS WELL AS the Governance Working Group shows the evolution of WG0 to the Ape Assembly but it also shows that the community function will in the future be under the Marcomms area. Also the fact that the costs for the discord are paid now by GWG budget. Previously various costs were paid by the ApeCoin Foundation.

Given this factual data the Discord issue must be addressed and the Ape Assembly is the best group and platform to solve this issue.

If someone doesn’t hand it over technically, which the technical owner has not suggested meaning they would not withhold the asset. Then you are right there are solutions:

  1. Create a new discord (not the ideal solution). Based on AA CAP or ApeCoin.eth AIP to do so.

  2. Legal solution based on theft of an asset (not ideal, also I don’t think that the technical administrator has an intention to go this way).

Therefore the best is to have it transferred and managed based on the voting of the Ape Assembly. If after the vote is complete and there are any issues the other less preferable options would have to be examined.

Hey @bigbull,

We’ve had a chance to discuss this previously, and my DMs are always open for the community, hopefully this will resolve any of the confusion here.

The community server was established to facilitate discussions during the transition period when Working Group 0 managed the transfer of administrative duties from The Cartan Group to WebSlinger and the ApeCoin community. I was given charge of the server during this period as one of the most active community members, and I have been contractually obligated to the community and foundation since the start of this year, following my participation in the WG0 elections and the approval of AIP-240. Our agreed-upon process among the members who established the server is that I will transfer ownership of the server to the MarComms working group when they are ready to assume responsibility for it.