To be considered for any position within the DAO you need to have spent time contributing within the DAO
Be able to pass a super low competency quiz on what the DAO does
Explain what the various positions do, how they relate to one another
Be able to explain with clear understanding the last 5 AIPs (passed or didn’t pass) without looking at notes.
[ Open to other low/minimum barrier competency checks]
Can also scale the degree of knowledge and understanding depending on position (top role needs to understand more, face a bit more scrutiny to a degree compared to a role that only focuses on marketing let’s say)
Timeline ASAP
Steps to implement and cost - low cost - maybe hire an outside firm to do this or have a mediator meet with the current SC and stewards to decide, would take time to do but I think the benefits will be lasting.
Open to discuss!
Proposals submitted to the AIP Ideas category can be vague, incomplete ideas. Topics submitted here are not required to be submitted as a formal AIP Draft Template, however, you may still use the template if you wish.
Hello. Hey there are a lot of ways to gauge participation. For example, your participation starting in the fall through Thank Ape has been valuable to the ecosystem. I’m unsure if I ask you in a call to list the last 5 proposals if you’d give an adequate answer. I do think it’s worth discussing however we don’t want to discourage participation.
Instead it’s important to focus on the spirit of leveling up others. Again, you’re an example of someone who has contributed in a certain way that may not measurable through stats. Something to consider as you’re hearing thoughts around ideas. Just try not to discourage from participating even if their competency is lower. People can level up!
As a voter, considering voting to appoint someone based on knowledge of most recent 5 AIPs isn’t important to me at all. The AIP process itself is far more important.
If I were running (especially for the top position), you can bet that I would be able to list the last 10 (not just 5) AIPs and why they passed or didnt pass and my thoughts on how it could’ve been a better proposal.
I do believe in the spirit of leveling up others but to step in day 1 and apply for the top role without any clear indication of competency or clear understanding of what it is we do is not the way. As a matter of fact, I would argue that its a bit disrespectful.
Appreciate this Sword, that being said - If my plans were to run in the next elections, you can bet your bags that I would be in here grinding with the rest of you to show my commitment and more importantly to learn all the intricacies to prepare for the position (not just to garner votes).
Hey Br00no - thats just one piece of the pie, that being said - I think it’s very important for a representative of the DAO to understand the current AIP “meta” (if you will), after all the DAO’s main prop is to fund AIPs
Thanks. I grasp the intent, however to me a laundry list doesn’t demonstrate any competency.
Asking thoughts / issues / risks of those 5 AIPs maybe, (perhaps wrt the role in question), how they vibe with the Mission (when one exists), etc. seems much more telling.
I love the intention of this idea. What does the actual list of “requirements” actually entail would be quite the conversation. I think the heart of what you are trying to get at is that people who want to “work” for the DAO should have some sort of skin in the game. I will be interested to see where this convo goes.
This is a fine line between being open and welcoming to all while also trying to ensure those who are “running” the DAO have a firm understanding of the DAO, its processes, governance, current trends and topics, etc.
1st one - yes plz, a minimum lvl 2 on the forum would be my suggestion
2nd - not sure how you’d enforce that. Are quiz questions made up before each election and are written on the app? If so, can offline research answers. If they’re voice question - no way to verify all questions were the same unless recordings published. This is already being done through Spaces that candidates attend, community gets a chance to see if they know basic stuff.
3rd - same: maybe just a question for Spaces/interviews?
Honestly, I think the voters are pretty good sussing out candidates. I think I can predict with high accuracy who the top 5 candidates will be after 1st round of voting and all of them meet your criteria above.
I like the idea of candidates applying for roles within the DAO requiring some basic level of particiaption and understanding of how the DAO functions.
I like the general idea of this, but I do agree with several above that the actual measure of qualifications could be complicated. But I like the intent of it, would just need to be polished into whatever people feel comfortable with.
That single criteria was generally well received, it was also seemingly an effective way to not only surface qualified members, but also to set a bar for other members to strive for (one which requires at least 2 weeks of consistency).
Since one of the stated roles of the Special Council is to review the content of proposals prior to voting, a Trust Level 3 requirement could make sense, however, this could become a seriously limiting factor for attracting members who are otherwise qualified. (see Phase 6)
Since there are various community roles in the DAO, and likely more to come, would it make sense to differentiate these criteria for some of the specific roles which are already established?
How do you feel about using Trust Levels as a way to measure your expected qualifications?
Interestingly, we can customize the standard forum criteria to reach the various Trust Levels, which is something you could propose the changes for here.
This whole concept is a discussion that I’ve had with several members of our DAO many times and in various settings, it’s nice to see a more formal discussion.
Your idea of a competency check seems promising and would certainly ensure that all new members have a basic understanding of the organization and its goals. However, I do have a few questions regarding this process:
Could you clarify the structure and content of the competency quiz? Is it something that can be standardized, or should it be tailored to specific positions?
The proposal states that a candidate should be able to explain the last five AIPs. While this could indicate that the candidate is up-to-date with the DAO’s recent activities, wouldn’t it be more beneficial if they also demonstrated an understanding of significant past AIPs?
Regarding scaling the degree of knowledge and understanding depending on the position, how do you propose to objectively measure the depth of understanding required for each role?
I don’t see why they should know without notes? Top lawyers also look at notes. I think their reasons and explanation/understanding is far more important than just memorising and repeating them.
Your topic will be moving to the AIP Draft phase in less than 24 hours. Are you content with the feedback received or do you wish to extend community discussion for another 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.
Thank you 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. @foxSlightly please see your messages for the next steps.
This Topic has been rejected based on the DAO-approved guidelines due to no response in the last 30 days. The Topic may be submitted again by any user and upon approval, will be open for 7 days for community discussions.
This Topic will move and remain in the Withdrawn AIPs category.