Dissolve The Marketing & Communications Working Group

[SmartAPE]

@PhilWatkins

From experience - the problem with putting forward singular reforms such as this, there is no clear path forward as to what you are attempting to change the structure into.

Yes there is a clear path. I’m trying to cut down on needless expenses for what basically amount to ineffective “no show” jobs. They seemed like a good idea at the time.

@PhilWatkins

By closing down one or all of the working groups you deem not necessary, have you calculated the resource requirements on the working groups left standing? What about the opportunity cost due to the restructure at arguably the most important time in Apecoins history with the launch of Apechain.

Yes, I have. I tend not to waste time on pointless ventures. I deemed all three WGs to be ineffective, useless and inconsequential. It’s not personal.

Ape Foundation Transparency Report - 2024 - Q1

In any financial setting, when low on funds you take steps to extend the financial runway. And that means, cutting staff, projects etc. This is standard practice. Even Yuga - with over $450M to burn - did two rounds of layoffs for specifically those reasons.

Regardless, at the end of the day, it’s up to the DAO to make the final determination.

@PhilWatkins

Is the core issue more one of a lack of reporting structures and transparency?

Not particularly, but those are just a part of it.

@PhilWatkins

The current working groups are working a lot to deliver tangible results, but is there a gap in highlighting their successes?

I haven’t seen any evidence of this, Phil; but do feel free to prove me wrong by posting some of the KPIs from this particular WG since it’s inception so that we can discuss them based on their merits.

@PhilWatkins

So instead of a complete restructure which will have serious long term effects,

The only long-term effect that I see is that the DAO wouldn’t have to keep spending almost $3M per year on WGs that are ineffective, inconsequential and which have thus far proven to be largely immaterial in anything promised.

@PhilWatkins

is there a more pragmatic and proactive approach to improve the comms and transparency piece, ensuring that WG’s budgets, initiatives, desired and actual outcomes are frequently reported on.

That ship already sailed. If you guys thought all of the above were important to the community and that accountability and transparency were critical, this proposal wouldn’t have any reason to exist.

I gain nothing from writing all these proposals. I do them because, if nothing else, at least at some point someone can say “We tried to do this, that and the other” - and on the record for doing just that. For quite some time I have believed that the DAO is going to die - and I am on the record (both here and in my social media feeds) as saying as much. There’s no if, and or but about it - but only when. And while I hope to be proven wrong, if/when that day comes, we can all look back at those who tried - in vein - to save it. To wit: it’s Sun morning here in FL and I’m sitting on my deck responding to all these Discourse posts because my week is going to be hectic. I deemed them to be necessary and important.

@PhilWatkins

Just my 2 cents and initial thoughts. Happy to jump on a call for further discussion anytime.

I fully understand where you’re coming from because it’s no different from any situation whereby someone has to defend a grant renewal, a program that’s about to be defunded, a dept. team that’s about to be disbanded, a job that’s about to be made redundant etc. I get it. That said, you’ve done an admirable job in this regard, and your missive above [eloquently] highlights the sort of things which would be discussed during such meetings.