No more dumb sh__t.

AllCityBAYC · September 27, 2024, 4:02pm

Been gone for a minute, but now I’m back… What’d I miss?

First off, I’m not here to tell you how to vote on AIP-466 or say that the Working Group (WG) structure is perfect. Heck, I’m not even going to tell you that it’s efficient. But what I am going to tell you is, don’t get it twisted — the Governance Working Group is built different, and trying to paint any picture other than that is noise.

In fact, I’m gonna ask you to take a quick breath and give me three examples of a more accountable, high-impact grant recipient in the history of ApeCoin DAO outside of ThankAPE and Boring Security; who takes a more community-focused, multifaceted approach.

Three is actually pretty generous. How about one?

Now think about how many failed and/or unaccountable grants have been issued by the DAO, and you’re looking to shut down a premium top-5 example? Sorry, I’m not following. If you’re looking to shut down the WG structure as a whole, that’s fine, but trying to scapegoat us as some under-delivering group — when we not only hit every OKR but obliterate them and all associated expectations — is no bueno. Don’t cheapen what we have done for the community, and don’t try to erase our personal accomplishments, which will live with all of us well beyond ApeCoin, just to get a bigger ideology over the finish line. This approach also seeks to embarrass us and the voters who believe in what we do, which, to be clear, is the large majority of the voting ApeCoin DAO, as shown by both the election and financial plan voting results.

So keeping all of that in mind, and whether you’re new around here after getting caught up with the latest copy/pasta on Twitter [likely taken way out of context] or just need a reminder about what the GWG does on a day-in, day-out basis, I’m gonna give it to you straight.

ApeCoin DAO innovation:

The first body under the ApeCoin umbrella to start issuing small grants.
The first body under the ApeCoin umbrella to execute grants fully on-chain.
The first body under the ApeCoin umbrella to normalize the regular use of professional service providers to assure that what we are delivering to the community is first-class
The first body under the ApeCoin umbrella–and broader ecosystem–to run an official voting delegation program
The first body under the ApeCoin umbrella–and broader ecosystem–to develop a suite of education and training resources [including proposal writing mentorships] for not only the ApeCoin community, but also those from the community who help administer the training
The first body under the ApeCoin umbrella that has not only once, but consistently, brought together representatives from all primary voting delegations in the same room to discuss pivotal ApeCoin DAO proposals like the Banana Bill and the ApeChain RFP — with all pitch authors present.
The first body under the ApeCoin umbrella to provide rewards for process improvement ideas and to develop a resource bank for community member service providers — whom we have used on an ongoing basis.
The first Working Group under the ApeCoin umbrella to develop an independent legal structure to help further decentralize the DAO and de-risk the APE Foundation as well as ourselves.

ApeCoin DAO Twitter Spaces & Newsfeed:

We also create content. A LOT OF CONTENT. The ApeComms and the ApeCoin main account do a good job getting information out there, but so do we. And we do it on a daily basis, with full-time creation coupled with images to make digesting our messaging easy. We also run offset Twitter Spaces each and every week — one with OpenCampus on DAO education, and the other with Aaron Haber and Ernest Lee, pairing voting delegations and AIP authors with all sorts of interesting reward mechanics (thank you Aaron for leading, and developing, this outstanding initiative!).

Quick Fast Fact:

Guess how many contributors the GWG issues compensation to for their ongoing contributions with us?

Well, including Stewards, program coordinators, the DAO Secretary, proposal writing coaches, and grants committee members — the number is 18. Can you believe that? Fifteen of those selected directly from the ApeCoin DAO community. This number is actually far more when considering other types of service providers, and an additional 3 with the Facilitator team up until a little less than one month ago.

Transparency & Reporting:

This has been paramount for us.

Have you ever seen anything from any grant recipient who’s received DAO funding provide anything like this on a regular basis? Most companies or other DAOs provide one-pagers. We go the extra mile, recognizing that more often than not, there will be new viewers for these documents who may not yet fully understand what we do, so we create a refined handbook for them.

Want to know something else that’s kind of interesting? Outside of producing [some form] of quarterly reporting, we aren’t mandated to deliver upwards of 90% of what we do.

Our core responsiblilities were written before I arrived here [July 2023] has four line items on it, two of which were salaries… But we don’t roll like that. We are here to drive value to you, the COMMUNITY.

Is the setup perfect? No, but no startup is, and that is exactly how we treat this because that’s essentially what we are. That is really what every DAOs is, as we are all new and feeling our way around what works and what doesn’t.

Compensation? Let’s talk about it:

Recently, we parted ways with the Facilitator team. This was based on many logistical reasons, primarily revolving around contract differences. All great guys, all very passionate about the DAO — and all of whom I consider friends. But the GWG needed to start pairing comps down, and we didn’t want to be the ones determining what value that initiative is bringing on a cost vs return basis, and in-turn didn’t want to be the ones asking you for the amount of funding that has become normalized over the years.

As far as the DAO Secretary role goes, we are all very sad to see Bojangle leave. And on a personal level, I have known him as a friend for quite some time and have always worked well together. He’s smart, organized and well rounded. But that role also needed to change, particularly for the reasons listed in his resignation statement posted in here a few days ago. And I’d be remiss not to add that the compensation for this position was set to decrease on October 1st from $7,000 USD per month down to $5,000 USD per month.

The last thing I’m going to add on this topic is a simple reminder that NOBODY working at the DAO on a Working Group level has access to benefits, overtime, sick leave, medical, dental, health insurance, pension, childcare assistance, or employment insurance [which it’s looking like all of us could use in a few weeks] – so let’s chat a little about that next.

THIS IS MY JOB. And one that I take extremely seriously, which far exceeds full-time hours. And I couldn’t tell you how many job offers I’ve either declined because it would affect my ability to perform at ApeCoin, or had been blocked because I was an elected member, no matter how far out of my GWG scope those positions would have been. We are also required to disclose if we are being paid in relation to other AIPs, a logical request, but for the record, for every one or two times you see my name listed as an [unpaid] advisor on an AIP proposal, there are +20 hours of separate guidance I provide to other AIP authors that you don’t see my name on. Why? Because I care. I care about you, I care about the DAO – I care.

Let’s actually chat about scope, or more specifically all the work that gets done outside of it…

Every Steward partakes in an insane amount of business development and ecosystem growth activities — unpaid, and entirely out of scope. We are official ambassadors of ApeCoin DAO 24/7, whether asleep getting messages on Twitter, Discord or Telegram, or at an IRL event that we likely paid to attend out-of-pocket.

Shutting Down Individual Working Group Initiatiatives & Clawbacks:

This is wild to me.

It’s one thing to shut down Working Groups, another to shut down all Working Groups without giving the ApeCoin DAO community an opportunity to see what’s going on with them on an individual level, and a whole other to start targeting specific initiatives – particulalry fully approved, funded, operating and successful initiatives.

This where AIP-466 really starts to get away from me, as for some reason it has singled out the GWG on-chain small grants program.

This is a highly organized program with a 13 person voting Committee that is constanly evolving. It’s also the first on-chain grant excuting program in the history of ApeCoin DAO. We’re actually even on a one-week pause to recalibrate a little, digest feedback from our committee, and come back with some new experimental adjustments to continue optimizing output while conserving it’s overall allocation, which has provided direct assistance to countless MBA programs and numerous Apefest events, helping take the burdan off of Yuga Labs, ThankAPE and the BAYC Council.

Future plans for this initiative involve streamlining a more categorized approach with mini-RFP style rounds targeting specific needs of the braoder ApeCoin ecosystem – and everyone who has anything even remotely to do with the program will tell you about it, as we have open group calls on a biweekly basis with everyone.

Also,imagine looking to target DAO education and the impact we’re making with Open Campus from Animoca Brands on the APE_U initiative. That is an absolute embarressment to be looking to shut something like this down with “an orderly wind-down of the operations of any/all activities and entities (e.g. sub-DAOs) associated with the affected Working Groups”.

The Delegate Accelerator, a separate high-impact initiative, is another education-focused program that has literally created 10 new voting groups and further empowered four smaller, already-operating communities.

Furthermore, with a claw back on already approved funds for an already approved initiative, why would anyone want to possibly try and go through the AIP process AGAIN to put it back up, after it has been stopped dead in it’s tracks, often involving professional service providers.

This is the equevelant of a municpal government shutting down a public school which has overwhelming support from it’s surrounding community, laying the teachers off and then suggesting to reapply for the same amount of funding afterward because its valuable infrastructure.

Furthermore, suggesting to claw back funds from one Working Group to back pay Stewards from another is very, very odd, assuming that is the intent of “To pay in full, to affected stewards, any/all amounts that are in arrears.” And if so, are we now suggesting that the work of the GWG Stewards is equal to that of Stewards who have been expected to operate with no budget? Look, the GWG is proud to have helped multiple Working Groups with unsecured loans to assist with their legal formation and other reasonable requests, all of which have been paid back in full. However, not only is the system for new Stewards and Working Groups broken—forcing them to go through elections just to get here, and then telling them they have to do it all over again to actually get anything done—but how could we possibly compare what they are able to do with fully functioning, entirely funded Working Group Stewards executing their duties?

I’m also not sure how a price tag could be put on this considering there is absolutely no actual mandated salary for Stewards, particularly outside of the Governance Working Group. In fact, the only reference to Steward compensation was written back in March 2023, and as the image below shows, expired in August 2023, and only even ever applied to the GWG.

In Closing:

As mentioned from the top, the current WG structure is not ideal, efficient or economically sound for a sustainable ApeCoin DAO future in its current iteration.

But the GWG is quite simply not the same, and the DAO needs public infrastructure — a body that can operate community-driven initiatives with a team in place to manage them, which is exactly what we have evolved into and planned to keep doing.

I’ll also add that there is a large element of pride in my writing, as I’m the one who leads this group, have been here the longest, gone through two elections with a total of eight successful DAO-wide campaigns under my belt and had the progressive vision to evolve the GWG into something much more than the four line items listed back in 2023. But none of that pride would ever come before what’s best for the DAO or the wishes of the ApeCoin community, nor would it skew my reasoning expressed in this message.

So, all of that being said, once the dust settles and we see how the community votes, if it’s determined that the Working Group structure as a whole is not what the DAO wants, the GWG legacy should live on through its initiatives—whether on a short- or long-term basis, depending on the amount of funding left over—and not be clawed back, cheapening everything we execute successfully, every day of the week.

Some examples might be…

Once on-chain small grant funds are exhausted, offer that infrastructure to ThankAPE.
For the Delegate Accelerator, perhaps @bigbull and @shotgun.tobi put up an independent proposal for the APE Foundation to delegate APE out to groups on behalf of the program, with any existing funding currently used to delegate out, sent back to the ApeCoin DAO treasury permissionlessly, minus a reasonable amount to maintain its operations.

Lastly, I just want to mention @SmartAPE and @capetaintrippy, whom I both know and respect. Although I’m frustrated with this approach, my post is written with an understanding of the broader thinking you share. But as someone who has lived, eaten, and breathed ApeCoin DAO since joining as an elected member back in July 2023, I’m going to go to bat for my team and what we’ve built.

AC

Homepage of the ApeCoin DAO Governance Working Group Initiatives Hub:

All of our programs accesible from one place.

ApeCoinGWG x OpenCampus APE_U Education Program:

We are ApeCoin education.

ApeCoinGWG x UMA On-Chain Small Grants Program:

The first small grant program under the ApeCoin DAO umbrella
The first grant program to be executed fully on-chain

Screenshot 2024-09-27 at 7.04.59 AM1850×959 136 KB

Screenshot 2024-09-27 at 7.05.32 AM1784×840 164 KB

Screenshot 2024-09-27 at 7.06.10 AM1793×708 161 KB

ApeCoinGWG Delegate Accelerator:

The first program to delegate voting power out to the community
14 total voting groups; 10 established; 4 existing
Over 2,000,000 APE in combined voting power when including APE that these communities either purchased upon joining the program or already held

ApeCoinGWG Community Governance Improvement Program:

Empowering the ApeCoin ecosystem by inviting community members to submit ideas that enhance governance processes or address other areas within the GWG’s scope for APE rewards
Resource bank for ApeCoin DAO community members who provide services for a fee

ApeCoinGWG Global Community Committee:

Monthly delegate calls
Representatives from all ApeCoin DAO voting delegations
Discussions on current ongoings and presentations from high-impact AIP authors

ApeCoinGWG Community Polls:

AIP Author Feedback: AIP Author Feedback
ApeCoin DAO GWG General Feedback: ApeCoin DAO GWG General Feedback Survey
ApeCoin DAO GWG Transparency & Communications Survey: ApeCoin DAO Governance Working Group Transparency & Communications

ApeCoinGWG MadeByApes Voting Delegation Onboarding Kit:

Created for the upcoming Yuga Labs created MBA voting delegation
Various onboarding tools to help make better informed decisions

ApeCoinGWG Website:

Offered in five languages

ApeCoinGWG Gitbook:

Various technical documents and applicable information

Screenshot 2024-09-27 at 7.53.40 AM

ApeCoinGWG Community Voting Dashboard:

Various ApeCoin DAO voting metrics
Real-time push notifications on mobile once AIPs go live on Snapshot

Screenshot 2024-09-27 at 7.59.35 AM
Screenshot 2024-09-27 at 8.00.11 AM

ApeCoinGWG [Twitter] News Feed:

Over 5300 followers
Daily ApeCoin & ApeCoin DAO coverage
Weekly Twitter Spaces
Nearly 763,000 impressions so far in 2024
5200 Retweets
4600 Replies

Screenshot 2024-09-27 at 8.04.50 AM

SmartAPE · September 27, 2024, 5:31pm

I am going to assume that this was directed at myself and @capetaintrippy since we’re the authors of AIP-466.

But before I even get into this, I invite you to carefully read how the GwG ended up being added to AIP-466 when in fact the original proposal was specifically targeted at the three new working groups. Start here:

There was neither an inference of the GwG being used as a “scapegoat” nor was it implied anywhere in the proposal (I invite you to check the proposal edits) nor in the comments. As such, this rhetoric is needlessly inflammatory and without merit. Stop that.

As to the OKR and such, that’s largely irrelevant and inconsequential to the reasons surrounding the proposed closing of the WG. Yes - it’s never easy to lose a job, see your dept get defunded, a grant not renewed etc. Especially if it’s a highly paid $7K per month gig. But everything needs to regarded in context and within scope of the activity being suggested.

The issue here is that the DAO is entering a new era and [drastic] changes are needed.

I have to point out that, you took the time to write this entire missive, and not once - not even once - did ANY of you stewards in ANY of the WGs - take a moment to opine on the critical issue surrounding the fact that THE DAO IS ALMOST OUT OF MONEY. To wit: Ape Foundation Transparency Report - 2024 - Q1

But here we are discussing the merits of closing a WG that’s costing the DAO over $1M per year, and that’s more important.

While nobody is discounting the role that the GwG has played in the DAO, the above isn’t relevant.

Oh really? Right. So how embarrassed would the GwG if the DAO can no longer afford to fund its budget? And where is it written that the DAO - that’s us btw - can’t defund a WG as it sees fit? Where does it say that these working groups were designed to be permanent?

Now you want to bring the topics of transparency and accountability into scope?

To be clear, I have yet to see any comment here on Discourse that seeks to impugn the GwG stewards let alone discard their role and accomplishments in the DAO - and for which each steward has been handsomely paid for their service to the DAO.

There is no claw back in AIP-466. Please outline where you see this in the proposal. In fact, it specifically accounts for ensuring that not only are all stewards paid, but also that there is an orderly shutdown of the GwG.

As per claw backs, even the grants program run by the GwG being defunded is not a claw back. The GWG On-Chain Small Grants Program can just terminate and stop giving out grants. In that case, we can simply state that the grant program terminates at some point - or when it runs out of funds. It’s not as if this was something that the DAO was supposed to be funding in perpetuity. It’s tied to the GwG budget request. Heck, even ThankApe came back for a second grant of a larger 4M when the first grant was depleted. If that request had failed at vote, that would likely have been the end of ThankApe. It happens. We move on. It’s not personal.

What are you talking about? The steward salaries are right there in your own GwG budget AIP-408: Q2/Q3 2024 Governance Working Group Budget

I want to end this by reiterating - again - that none of this is personal. The DAO created and funded this WG and elected the stewards in them. And so, only the DAO can reverse that decision - as it sees fit.

ps. I noticed that you didn’t mention the Ape-U initiative (which nobody seems to know what’s going on with that) which I believe you are also a part of via the GwG. Did I miss that?

LOR3LORD · September 27, 2024, 8:15pm

Personally, I don’t want to see the GWG be removed. They do A LOT of good work, and it’s nice to have a central place to get updates, information, clarification, and support that we may not get directly from the DAO or a specific AIP.

I would 100% support the removal of people who are not showing up to do the work that needs to be done. It appears that seems to be in issue in more than one working group, and I say put a process forward to get rid of those people if that is in fact true.

I think doing that would save the DAO money, send a message, and get us on the right track both financially and productively.

Dissolving groups that work, and losing good people seems like a net negative to me.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

SmartAPE · September 27, 2024, 8:22pm

I would like an explanation as to why the compensation was set to decrease, how that decision was made - by whom - and when.

likkee.eth · September 30, 2024, 9:31am

I believe most of us that are active in this forum would see those efforts done by you and your team, and all these are amazing. Thank you!

But we need to separate the view from the work done and the root issues. As you mentioned, the DAO structure is not perfect, no efficient; why don’t we make a change when the time comes?

Still remember my last asking why the GwG outcomes are not included in the official apecoin.com but in a separate domain, which highly distracts the public and traffic to get to know the amazing work done by GwG. They are not independent products like Yuga to the Otherside; they should be included and endorsed by the official Apecoin.com.

The current structure of DAO is totally a mess. Seem like everyone are working toward ApeCoin DAO, but they are not under a single umbrella, all are different entity. Some even elected but with no compensation. Each steward in each WG has their own AIP, almost zero cross-functionality, thus not working on the same goal and no questionable to each other. For me, this even look like “The company hired A; A outsourced the project to himself/herself, while claiming to benefit the company.”

I’m personally shocked when I’ve started to browse through this forum on an almost daily basis since August. Can a DAO really operate in this way?

Now might be the best timing to revamp the structure of DAO, reset, and restart. And you can lead this huge project with your past experiences and reflections. Consolidate the Ape Foundation, SC, WGs, banana bills, ApeChain, etc. Working toward a unified vision and mission.

Once again, thank you so much.

Evil · September 30, 2024, 10:10am

I’m in support of GWG since the beginning and in favor of closing in other WGs anyway. I think the only reason why people want to see different WGs close is because of the chain of events that have happened in the past which resulted in $ape going down + treasury being empty. In short their AIP dont say they close GWG, but close non-essential WGs.
I’ve also seen some events that prove that nepotism happens within the GWG, I wish this was false when other people were telling me this but slowly I also started seeing them few months ago. People see too many issues everywhere anyway, you would know coz you know me quite well lol, I’m one of those people.

I think people dont want to see unnecessary sense of power trip within the stewards. One way voting was one of the issues, playing bias is another. All of this overshadow whatever good GWG has accomplished coz as always, people will focus on negative.

Evil · September 30, 2024, 10:26am

ummm Sect role comes under GWG only, tho Bojangle didnt do a very good job and he will likely get the " Product Manager " position with $5,000 as hinted by few comments across the forums which I’ve seen.
So yeh they have the right to decrease the payment and its better than making an AIP just to decrease 2k from a role that wont even exist after tomorrow.

AllCityBAYC · September 30, 2024, 1:48pm

Appreciate this fam.

At the end of the day, I would hate to see all the work that’s been done be forgotten or cheapened in any way, which is how it felt when the proposal went up. But I don’t necessarily believe that it will anymore. And you’re right — look at the aftermath of all of this, as it is definitely not how we should want our DAO operating.

It honestly makes me sad to see, because when it all boils down, I’m here for ApeCoin, and ApeCoin DAO. And to recognize and act, to the best of my ability, on what’s best for it.

Ironically, on a personal level, I had been working with three separate groups, brainstorming ways to address the Working Group shortcomings — one formally within the GWG, and two a little more casually.

Moving forward, I think we all need to learn from this and improve how we communicate with one another for a brighter future, no matter how the WG structure turns out. Because at the end of the day, it’s the people who make all of this special, not the titles of a group. And for me, I’m here to stay, with or without a Working Group in this community.

This will likely be the last time I bump this topic, but I wanted to acknowledge your response and offer a few final thoughts.

AC

popil · September 30, 2024, 3:05pm

I would like to take this opportunity to thank @AllCityBAYC . Since I started, we have worked together on several different projects. At the same time, we have also mutually advanced each other’s events and education programs. GWG has provided resources and education to each working group and builder, and has promoted the development of the ApeCoin ecosystem and different communities.

Moreover, GWG has effectively utilized its internal talent resources and supported many BBAC projects, enabling builders who are new to the ApeCoin ecosystem to have enough resources to develop their projects. AC has also contributed to advancing multiple AIPs, often providing unpaid assistance to improve AIP proposals.

I also want to thank @bigbull and AC for supporting the newly elected MarComms in taking the first step towards establishing legal procedures and forming an independent LLC. Additionally, I want to clarify that @BojangleGuy has been hired as a secretary by GWG from the start, and I was one of the people who supported his initial election. Some of his responsibilities do not involve the other three WGs. Aside from organizing the weekly coordination of the All WG meetings, he is responsible for internal secretarial work for GWG. Therefore, he does not participate in the work of other WGs and is not familiar with the internal details of the other three WGs.

Regarding AIP 466, I would like to say that my feelings align with AC’s. To clarify, I agree that advancing and improving the structure is a positive change, but I also feel that the value behind the past contributions and the large number of tasks that have been executed over the past half year have been completely overlooked, misunderstood, and abandoned.

In proposing to close all WGs, the root problems were not addressed. Especially for @capetaintrippy , with whom I have worked, we had just begun advancing the 10KTF project, and I also recommended you as the most suitable person to lead this new project. I believe all SCs should also be well aware of the challenges faced by new WGs and the timeline for funding. The actual advancement is far more challenging and difficult than any ordinary AIP. Each working group has completed the work of the past six months under conditions of no compensation, fronting costs, and without resource assistance. Of course, I cannot represent everyone, but the WG stewards I’ve worked with have all contributed their personal time immensely, trying their best to help the DAO grow. Although everyone has a different way of doing things, this is precisely why each working group was created: to maintain independent management that helps extend the DAO’s ecosystem development.

Clearly, these issues could have been addressed more effectively and maturely.

Additionally, I will no longer respond to any negative or untrue matters. It consumes too much unnecessary time. Like AC, my primary responsibility is to fulfill my duties, especially regarding ApeFest. Our entire MarComms team had already arranged a comprehensive promotion plan two months ago, including filming and organizing over four events. I am proud to share that these efforts were made possible by the budget we saved from the first round, allowing us to allocate enough funds to save even more resources for the DAO. We have also continuously collaborated with Thank Ape to help creators push forward with BBAC.

If this is our MarComms’ last contribution to the community’s culture and brand, I am happy to have had the opportunity to collaborate with my team @Linstro.eth to add to ApeCoin DAO’s global culture. I hope you all have fun, and I look forward to meeting everyone IRL.

SmartAPE · September 30, 2024, 5:07pm

That’s not now that usually works. If there were “root problems”, they should have been addressed long before now.

You mean closing working groups in order to go a more efficient route isn’t an effective and mature action? Please explain why you have this view.

None of that is actually true. I have thus far failed to see any evidence whereby the above claim has been made - other than in requests for information and clarity as they pertain to those activities.

What’s true is that, like some others, you failed to respond to queries about what activities you actually engaged in. You wrote a long post about all of them, while claiming to have completed all KPIs, yet, there doesn’t exist any such metrics showing this.

While some stewards actually never even showed up, nobody engaged in these discussions is saying that the stewards didn’t do “something”. That’s not the issue here. The issue is that did stewards perform in the role for which they were paid, and is the on-going funding of the working groups sustainable in its current form? e.g. if I am hired as an accountant, just because I am helping to take out the garbage doesn’t mean that I have performed in my role as an accountant. That is to say, sure, some of you did in fact engage in some activities, but how do those activities (e.g. this is your explanation of same) relate to the roles that you were hired for? That’s all there is to this. It’s about performance evaluation and how the DAO has benefited from the funds that it has disbursed, and to find justification for doing so. Yes, this is a foreign concept to people who have no clue what accountability is, and so, any inference of being questioned about roles and procedures ends up being regarded as a personal affront. It shouldn’t be that way.

Nobody is asking you to do that. However, if someone says that you and/or a working group haven’t performed as expected, your job - as someone being paid by the DAo (that’s us btw) to do it - is to explain how that notion is incorrect, and to provide clarity and understanding. Regarding it as being “negative” or “untrue”, while refusing to respond with the aforementioned clarity, is precisely how we got to this moment in time.

While that’s nice and all, the DAO doesn’t need a funded working group to do any of that. The same activities can be funded by the DAO via individuals that it finds value in, trusts to do the job, and who are capable of performing these activities - and with transparency and accountability.

To be clear, though anything related to accountability and transparency tends to come with baggage that ends up making it personal, this proposal is clear as to why the working groups should - and hopefully will be - closed. Yes - of course I realize that there are good people in the DAO, but the fact is that the world is full of well-intentioned and good people who were once part of failed companies and communities.

This is CapTrippy in his own words which echo mine in several places:

Y’all know I love apecoin DAO and the people working in it. Change is hard but often times necessary. I will write a thread on AIP-466 before it finishes vote but know I asked to be on it to help push the DAO forward in a positive way. Before I ran for SC, one of the points I ran on for my platform was getting rid of vote for hire, and set up where the DAO hires and fires based on need. While I’m no longer on SC, I continue to seek what I set out to accomplish. This is the next step. Know that anything said on this is the person’s opinion that says it or posts it. Nobody speaks for me, but me. Onwards and upwards.

I will say this again, it is of no consequence to me whether or not this proposal passes. I neither gain nor lose anything either way. At the end of the day, it is up to the DAO to make its voice heard at vote. And so, anyone voting against this proposal sends a clear message that they are OK with the status quo and that nothing needs to change.

jarisjames · October 1, 2024, 4:44pm

As an active contributor to various DAOs, I want to express my strong support for keeping the Governance Working Group within ApeCoin DAO. My experience with ApeCoin DAO was initially limited to Twitter spaces and occasional AIP writing. However, the GWG has been transformative in enabling my direct contribution to the DAO through coding, content creation, and business development.

The GWG’s Small Grants program has been particularly impactful, allowing me to assist projects from other ecosystems in applying for funding. Also, through my affiliation with @AllCityBAYC and the GWG, I was introduced to the APE U initiative, leading to my role as an AIP Coach, an experience I deeply value.

The GWG serves as a bridge, enabling talented individuals to engage with the DAO without navigating the lengthy proposal process. It provides a pathway for offering services and contributing skills directly to the community. This accessibility and efficiency in onboarding talent is vital for the DAO’s growth and diversity.

In essence, the GWG has been instrumental in deepening my involvement and I’m grateful to be a part of it.