Working Group Charter - Essential Services Only

I have an exciting concept for a working group charter and would like to begin by discussing the minimum staffing required to operate the AIP process. I encourage anyone interested to contribute to this thread and help me develop this idea. It’s not necessary to incorporate the steward election model that the WG had been building upon with their Ape Assembly suggestion, which has yet to be approved. It’s important to note that the default AIP template is valid and should always be used, according to established precedent. I’ll frequently return to this thread to collect suggestions & help to build a simple “Essential Services Only” proposal


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. To get started, this how id like feedback:

Short paragraphs with complete thoughts.these pages will be browsed by delegates & others across the world. Please contribute. Often many utilize translate & now AI to more easily understand. Be respectful. Put time and thought into what others say and take your time to evaluate.

The target is 7 days to have a valid working group that does not use the election model that many forum community members may have not enjoyed, and now threatens to upend conservative precedence. The Ape Assembly is something this idea looks to avoid. This thread is for discussing technical details.

1 Like

Great idea. Thanks for posting it.

Whatever Working Groups will come to exist, there’s no reason or need for the current deluge (some would reasonably say “power grab frenzy”) of Working Group proposals.

Worse; there is absolutely no neutral 3rd-party ethical oversight in place, nor is there any proposed. Nor is there even a clear determination, or agreement among existing Stewards much less the DAO community at large, what the actual purpose and focus of the DAO even is.

Seems beyond odd to staff so many working groups and high-paid positions, without oversight, when the Mission Statement doesn’t exist and the DAO’s focus isn’t defined. That is not reasonable, efficient, or leadership in the space.

There is no clarity, or limit, now or proposed, on how many roles a given person can fill at one time or how many income streams they can enjoy by doing so at the same time. Before long - if not individually then certainly as a group - those in power will be able to swing any vote they want.

Nobody IRL staffs important positions via the greasy popularity contest that is political election cycles, nor do the best candidates sit around doing nothing while waiting for such opportunities to appear. Introverts don’t campaign, though they may be highly qualified and capable in the role. Also elections highly favor those already in power.

Proper, fair staffing can be done as follows:

  1. Clearly define the roles and skills required, one Working Group at a time. Also fixed term limits of no longer than 1 year max, possibly less. This can be done by community input here, by SC, by both in tandem.

  2. Interested applicants can submit their qualifications to a neutral hiring professional firm we could sub-contract at little relative cost. That firm, based on its IRL experience, can create a numbered master list. That firm can also suggest reasonable pay scales based on the roles and time requirements, rather than proposals seeming to pull big numbers out of thin air. And whatever happened to voluntarism?

  3. People from the community can be chosen at random to pick a number, or run a random number generator, and whatever person corresponds to that number is put in place in the role. There is NO more fair and equitable system than this to put qualified people in place.

  4. For those not making the cut, have the staffing firm offer constructive feedback and the DAO should consider funding an educational or training program if applicable that could get more people up-to-speed. Not everyone already has these skills, or should be left behind for not being a pandering politician.

  5. Cycle through the people put in positions after term limits expire, stagger the term limits to ensure continuity in the roles, and have a simple non-confrontational system in place to remove bad actors or problematic persons prior to term limits expiring.

  6. Without fail have neutral 3rd-party oversight auditing the financials and issues quarterly or semi-annual ethical opinions on expenses all activities, as well as on AIPs prior to voting, and on existing AIPs already passed.

  7. AIPs without a defined ending, including existing AIPs that have been passed and funded, should have a term limit applied at which point they expire or go up for renewal.

  8. Institute accountability proposals already in progress, or some version of accountability controls for existing and future successful AIPs.

  9. Whenever possible encourage AIPs to whittle down asks into milestone payments to keep projects and expenditures on-track and accountable.

These are the basics IRL. These work; efficiently and with minimal time wasted, drama or community conflict & division. No person, team, corporation, or even crime gang chooses people for important positions IRL by election, much less without legit oversight and ongoing accountability.


Thanks for sharing your thoughts @br00no . Here’s a few starting thoughts of mine.

Other groups are working on legal matters with long timelines. I’ll comment on them after reviewing. Your bullet points help me understand your perspective.

Our goal is to provide essential staffing for foundation activities, different from a DAO. Here are some definitions:

Ape DAO: The token holders each with their own interests & motivations.
Ape Foundation: The entity holding the money, providing processes, and not directing token holders.
Special Council: An existing body manded to oversee foundation administrators.
WG0 Stewards: Mandated to replace the prior cayman island administrators duties during the interim following a large decision made by token holders.

The existing special council already has oversight through precedence and prior AIPs. Some points involve finding qualified candidates working w/ stewards and maybe professional staffing services. Cayman Island Admins & these services cannot easily interact in forums or release guides without liability.

Last year, people were learning. Elections took place, and the stewards temporarily assumed positions. After a change in leadership, the stewards provided essential services. They should work with legal to find the best ways to handle services. The election model used was not ideal and excluded many community members. For those not participating in these essential services, creating an assembly or building delegation should be considered.

Regarding term limits, special council elections will happen soon. It’s better for the special council to continue overseeing foundation matters. The same people proposing these ideas have failed a Decentralized Events proposal, and their suggestions were recently rejected by token holders.

I’ll continue reading your posts and look to explore areas of common ground. I don’t have a draft proposal yet, but we can build on this discussion.


I doubt most token holders realize distinctions between DAO, Foundation and what the mandate of WG0 is (or was supposed to be). I doubt most token holders are clear on what the point of the whole thing even is.

We don’t have an agreed Mission, yet need to quickly appoint a bunch of highly-paid Working Groups… because … because the votes (elections) for AIP proposals aren’t passing often enough so let’s use the same system to elect people to oversee the circumvention of the AIP system because the Mission is…? Unclear.

My comments in post above are re: deluge of new proposed Working Groups, not Special Council, and that’s not oversight or how oversight works.

Sports analogy: oversight is not how the sport is traditionally played (precedence), and it is not the existing rule book (AIPs), and fair / ethical play is another thing entirely.

Read any headline in politics, health or economics from the past 3 years and you’ll have no end of poignant examples of what little precedence or rules matter when people in power decide to ignore them, and why that political system of appointing people into positions of power without any true oversight shouldn’t be copied in any way, shape or form.

Especially not while sitting on a giant honeypot of funds everyone wants a piece of, in a nascent sector world-renown for ethical violations and worse, while regulators are openly at war with that sector in general and looking at this endeavor specifically.

1 Like

Yes, @broono, I understand many discussions are happening, and oversight is crucial for you. Here’s an important page with info on Special Council for your interest.

…the reality is that today a DAO cannot sign a lease or hire people or make merch or whatever the community decides to do on its own. The Foundation is responsible for the day-to-day administration, bookkeeping, project management, and other tasks that ensure the ApeCoin DAO community’s ideas have the support they need to become a reality.

(Full text on )

I’m glad you also see the importance of avoiding harmful politics. I witnessed its negative impact on a World of Warcraft roleplay server with 20,000 active players, which never recovered.

Over a year, our community has gained an understanding of the distinctions between the Ape Foundation, the DAO body, and the forums. This knowledge helps proposal authors when presenting ideas to Apecoin, as different projects require different approaches.

Many individuals have become well-informed on this subject through months of forum interactions and community-led channels like Apecomms, and by extension WG0. Note that WG0 is not an official Apecoin asset. Assets must be owned by someone, and Special Council is designed for tasks like signing leases and overseeing projects as directed by the community.

While discussing oversight, remember that most things have a detailed public history. AIPs are in place for budget reporting in most cases, which might be due or overdue. I’ll do my best to map out a depiction of the Swamp for both here and elsewhere.

Credible effective oversight is absolutely crucial, no matter my opinion.

Also reporting is not oversight, especially when it’s self-reporting.

“Essential Services” includes proper oversight.

The “About” and “Governance” pages contain zero instances of “audit” and a single instance of “oversight”:

“A special council on the APE Foundation (the DAO’s “Board”) provides, at the behest of the ApeCoin DAO members, oversight of the Foundation administrators.”

Where can we see details of how that “oversight” is done, how it is defined, how often, and by whom?

In sharp contrast, “AIP” appears 115 times on the “Governance” page alone, yet there’s a lot of talk about changing and circumventing the existing AIP process.

Public companies don’t self-report to shareholders. They have a neutral, respected in the field and known, 3rd-party accountant prepare the figures and a totally different, respected in the field and known, neutral 3rd-party auditor audit those figures AND offer opinions stated in simple English on where dangers lie. These are mailed to shareholders quarterly and publicly available on official sites to anyone 24/7.

Consider the comments by Horizen on - in bold red letters, to their credit - about the dangers and possibilities of hacks, losing staked $APE if selling a connected NFT, etc. even though the smart contracts are audited by…yes… neutral and expert 3rd-parties.

Nobody would dare to have seriously suggested when staking was voted on that we skip proper oversight and auditing of Apestake, then just vote for a new dev team or institute safeguards after something bad happens, yet that’s the best we can do for all these new Working Group Charters?

Who is the Foundation’s auditor, and where can we all see the latest audit and the auditor’s comments, along with who is getting paid how much and from how many paid activities, how often, and for how long?

Maybe it exists. I’ve never heard about it, nor can I find it on the Foundation’s site.

As I read it, the About page states the Foundation or its Administrators are tasked to action or facilitate the will of the community. I’d argue that does include hiring, even if that means appointing a neutral and expert 3rd party to help with doing so, or whatever else is legally allowed, when tasked to do so by will of the community.

Wasn’t Horizen effectively hired to actualize

My emphasis added:

The Foundation consists of an administrative Board, which exists solely to oversee the decisions of the ApeCoin DAO, as well as a third party project management team in charge of ensuring ApeCoin DAO decisions are implemented.”

The Foundation is responsible for the day-to-day administration, bookkeeping, project management, and other tasks that ensure the ApeCoin DAO community’s ideas have the support they need to become a reality.

Hi @0xSword,

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.


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

Hi @0xSword,

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. @0xSword please see your messages for the next steps.


Hi @0xSword,

Acknowledging that you wish to withdraw your AIP. Your Topic will now be moved to the Withdrawn AIPs category.

Kind Regards,