Enable DAO-Wide Voting to Elect Working Group Stewards

And 2 weeks ago there were 0. This Snapshot was just created and 2 weeks is a blink of an eye in DAO time. More people are qualified to sign up already, and they will do so once given a reason to.

I posted mine July 26th in #Forming-Elections-Focus-Group. But again, due to mandate-stripping effort from Gov WG, the focus was on preserving AA mandate and that took everyone’s energy for weeks. Unfortunately.

2 Likes

Gm!

I’d like to extend the community discussion period. Thank you!

-Amplify

2 Likes

This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@Amplify has requested to extend the community discussion period for this AIP idea. This topic will automatically close a further 7 days from now. We encourage the community to continue to engage in thoughtful discussions through constructive criticism, honest feedback, and helpful suggestions.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

@Lost.Admin

This is misleading.

Vulkan proved recently the DAO wide votes are controlled by less than 3% of active voters.

The figures you are providing of 130,000 vs 30-40 are just plain and utter nonsense to present for comparison.

I am really annoyed by this tbh and will revisit later to give it all time to sink in; but you really need to provide better stats that are reflective of the actual voters who turn up consistently to vote.

Thank you @Amplify for the reply and answering my questions. I do have some additional comments

  1. I’m not really sure what the timing of AIP-239 has to do with this AIP and when it could be adjusted. Could you please clarify? According to AIP-1

This proposal went up almost immediately after the three month waiting period expired and there is no time limit on when a new proposal can be put up after that initial three months.

  1. a) While I also did see benefits in terms of awareness, participation, and engagement during the last two election cycles, I am really hesitant to assume that elections for Stewards of all potential working groups (other than Governance) would be a net positive. During the last cycle, where we had the Gov Steward elections concurrently with the Special Council’s, the majority of the engagement and focus was on and because of the Special Council Nominees and Candidates. For the second round of voting we had 24.75M voting power utilized for the Special Council Candidates, but only16M voting power utilized towards the Governance Stewards.
    b) I appreciate that you will consider editing this proposal to the Gov Stewards just facilitating the initial Steward elections for the Metaverse and Marketing and Comms working groups. I thought @ssp1111 made a good point about asking the members of the DAO if they want additional elections. People who are running for election generally spend a lot of time campaigning and reaching out to bigger voters. The bigger voters might not necessarily want that level of involvement in this and the increase in the number of candidates trying to get their attention and vote. If they did want to be involved on that level, they already qualify for the Ape Assembly. I do think an AIP asking the DAO voters what they would like to do in the future regarding Steward elections would be the easiest way to clarify their position.

  2. I also agree that the Ape Assembly isn’t ready to make those decisions, but they are decisions that don’t need to be made immediately imo. I strongly disagree that the DAO Secretary should be under the purview of the Governance Stewards. And the Secretary role is not “sort of an oversight and accountability position across all working groups”, it explicitly says in AIP-239, that it is an oversight and accountability role.

The Governance Stewards overseeing the DAO Secretary creates a huge conflict of interest and would set the Governance Stewards above the person who is supposed to be holding them accountable and they would basically be similar to being their boss. It’s very difficult to hold those who determine your future accountable.

  1. This is another material change to AIP-239 with big consequences. Per AIP-239:

Term limits for the Steward and DAO Secretary were something we discussed as WG0 Stewards and not having term limits for these positions is something I have always disagreed with you on in the past for several reasons:

  • There are many qualified people who would be happy to have the opportunity to work for the DAO in these various capacities and would do an excellent job.
  • Having term limits can also help to ensure that new ideas and perspectives are brought into the role and would prevent the concentration of power in the hands of a few.
  • Term limits can also can help to reduce the risk of corruption and abuse of power.

Also, it is up to the Ape Assembly to determine the length of the term of the position. Perhaps it would make sense for it to be a longer term than one or two years. It’s an assumption that one or two years is what the AA would decide. It’s a good discussion to have because I think everyone wants to encourage and retain top talent. But we have to be careful of insiders becoming ingrained as well.

  1. This would be a huge conflict of interest for the Governance Steward to hire the person who is supposed to oversee them and hold them accountable for the same reasons I mentioned above in number 6.

Thanks again Amplify for your detailed reply. Organization takes time, and things are always messy in the beginning before structure, policies, and procedures are put in place, but that doesn’t mean in time that the Ape Assembly can’t be successful once it’s more organized. It’s taking longer than anticipated, but I still think it’s worth giving the members of the AA time to organize, rather than taking their major responsibilities away permanently. :blue_heart:

6 Likes

Hi @Amplify,

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.

We look forward to hearing from you.

@Lost.Admin

This topic was automatically closed after 6 days. New replies are no longer allowed.

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@Amplify has requested to withdraw their application. This AIP will be moved to and remain in the Withdrawn AIPs category.

Kind Regards,

-12GAUGE