Returned for Reconstruction: Administrative Summary

Final AIPs Returned For Reconstruction
1

This post is intended to serve as a community resource to highlight the various reasons provided by the Special Council for why prior AIPs had been Returned for Reconstruction. For context, below is a description of the “Returned for Reconstruction” process within Phase 6: Administrative Review as described in AIP-1:

1143×675 64.7 KB

Here you’ll find listed (in order of AIP#) the stated reasons by the Special Council for why each AIP was Returned for Reconstruction. While all information here is publicly available and can be found within each individual AIP, the summary is provided here for the benefit of the community. This is intended to be a living document, and will be updated as more proposals are Returned for Reconstruction.

  1. AIP-42: Stake Ape Dao Treasury with Lido Finance
  • Moderator: “the [Special] Council concluded that establishing a holistic DAO treasury management and asset allocation strategy is necessary before diverting a significant amount of treasury funds to a specific asset. Once such a strategy has been put together, the proposal would be in a stronger position to take into consideration. The author or any community member is welcome to submit a proposal for a holistic treasury management strategy, and/or bring the matter up for community discussion on the Discourse forum.”
  1. AIP-65: To incentivise decision making activity by rewarding ApeCoin DAO voters with free NFTs from a new collection
  • Moderator: “[Special Council] cited that the voting process should not be used to endorse projects. The author is encouraged to pursue creating their new collection and we wish success in future efforts. Feel free to share the project with the community and we’ll review where we can best engage on social media. We would also encourage submitting any other AIP that does not require an endorsement via voting at this time.”
  1. AIP-72: High Security for Discord
  • No rationale provided
  1. AIP-80: To reveal what is hidden in the DAO management system
  • Special Council: “While transparency is important, discussions that are not revealed is intentional given that there could be considerations that are not supposed to be public due to matters of safety and security, for not just SC members but also the DAO, that is the reason SC members sign NDAs as well as other members who work closely with the DAO so they can operate a certain way. This incidentally is also typical for governments, foundations, etc. as in operating under confidentiality clauses. The general view is that voting in new SC members solves for that.”
  1. AIP-83: Proposal for ApeFi to receive ApeCoin token Grant
  • Special Council: “To provide authors with the opportunity to reconstruct the proposal.”
  1. AIP-90: ApeCoin Claim Extension for Original Holders
  • Moderator: “the Special Council cited that the cost of this proposal disproportionately benefits a small number of ApeCoin DAO members.”
  1. AIP-99: Rescue Rari Hack victims with frozen Apecoin collateral in Fuse Protocol
  • Moonkt (Cartan Administrator): ​​”the Special Council cited concerns about not knowing of the recipients of the designated wallets.”
  1. AIP-130: Bored Ape Food Festival - A Feast for the Apes!
  • No rationale provided
  1. AIP-141: Ape Accelerator by ApeCoin
  • No rationale provided
  1. AIP-148: Forever Apes // Upgrade #3 // Biweekly cards games and tutorials for all $APE holders
  • Moonkt (Cartan Administrator): “the Special Council cited that the ApeCoin DAO funding and tweeting about card games could be seen as directly promoting gambling. This AIP is at odds with the mission, values, or well-being of the Foundation or DAO.”
  1. AIP-170: Let’s build a Public Relations team to promote building in the APE ecosystem
  • Special Council: “The Ape Foundation cannot be the client of a PR firm.”
  1. AIP-189: Add $APE Compounder button at app.apestake.io
  • Special Council: “This is effectively submitting an AIP on behalf of another party. The author would first need consent from Horizen and/or have Horizen be a Co-Author on the proposal. Otherwise, it is not appropriate for the DAO to consider AIPs for third parties. The author can build an auto compounder without DAO approval, and interact directly with the contract.”
  1. AIP-191: ApeCoin DAO Mission Statement Workshop
  • Mallard (Cartan Administrator): “the Special Council cited that a mission statement can be crafted to appropriately serve the purposes of WG0. However, the proposal, as it is written, is at odds with the well-being of the Foundation.”
  1. AIP-199: Hire Independent Ethics Managers

  • Special Council: “Core to the comments are:

    • How can we be sure that the ethics manager is accountable and who would they be accountable to?

    • Is there an ethics code or an evaluation framework this ethics manager would be following?

    • How is the ethics manager accountable to the community and how are things made more transparent by having an ethics manager?”

  1. AIP-229: Establish guidelines for ApeCoin staked in protocols to be counted for voting power
  • Special Council: “The community would benefit from seeing proposals to count voting power for individual groups, protocols and collectives separately.”
  1. AIP-276: Implementing oSnap for Optimistic Governance in ApeCoin DAO
  • Special Council: “Proposal is in conflict with AIP-1.”
  1. AIP-277: Re-evaluating ApeCoin DAO Special Council Salaries Structure
  • APE Foundation: “Ape Foundation has determined that AIP-277 needed to be reconstructed as Ape Foundation is not able to put AIPs up to vote that would compel Ape Foundation to breach its contractual obligations.”
  1. AIP-342: Capping Voting Power At 1 Million
  • Special Council: “Proposal is at odds with Guiding Value, Equality: One APE equals one APE.”
  1. AIP-351: Interim-Communications Action Team (CAT): Proactive PR & Setting-up the Marketing Working Group for Success
  • Special Council: “Author has decided not to proceed with the AIP to vote at this time.”
  1. AIP-357: Streamlined AIP Timing Process
  • Special Council: “The DAO already has response time guidelines (see AIP-144). The AIP process requires flexibility to ensure the process is accessible to authors who are unfamiliar with the AIP process, and to effectively respond to AIPs involving complex legal and regulatory considerations. The proposed mandates would create risk for the APE Foundation and are inconsistent with the well-being of the DAO and the Foundation.”
  1. AIP-359: Special Council Vote of No Confidence
  • Special Council: “This AIP attempts to force the APE Foundation into multiple courses of action which would create significant risks and would not be consistent with the wellbeing of the APE Foundation and the ApeCoin DAO.”
  1. AIP-361: Community alignment on the immediate reduction or elimination of $APE staking emissions
  • Special Council: “Author is free to directly put forth a governance proposal which will outline various options to reduce or eliminate $APE staking emissions, as well as the necessary operational and technical considerations.”
  1. AIP-386: Add Guideline to have AIPs request only in $APE
  • Special Council: “It’s not reasonable to have every AIP denominated in ApeCoin when the intention is to ensure they have the funding to meet the obligations in their AIP. Requiring all proposals to be denominated in $APE would compromise the ability of the DAO to offer competitive grants that provide business certainty to grant recipients.”
10 Likes