This proposal gathers the comments of several delegates, contributors and discussions that took place in the different groups. We thank @Boardroom and @Sebix for their contributions to this proposal.
We propose integrating the Governance Facilitator role into the DAO, outlining its selection process and guidelines.
In the post [RFC-3] Introduction of a new role in governance - Governance Facilitator, we emphasized the importance of introducing the Facilitator within the DAO. Their presence will boost governance growth, streamline the DAO's internal processes, and foster more dynamic communication with the Arbitrum Foundation. To achieve this effectively, it is essential to set a rigorous selection criteria and define the initial guidelines governing the Facilitator's activities within ArbitrumDAO.
The escalating activity within ArbitrumDAO underscores the imperative for a specialized role akin to that of a Facilitator. This role has been successfully implemented in analogous governance frameworks, yielding favorable outcomes.
Recent discussions in the forum and subsequent proposals have underscored the necessity for a role dedicated to expediting the establishment of frameworks and processes within ArbitrumDAO. The primary aim is to ensure that governance can effectively institute these processes, thereby fostering the continued growth and success of Arbitrum.
The Governance Facilitator position is poised to play a pivotal role in shaping the trajectory of ArbitrumDAO's governance. Aligned with the fundamental principles of the Arbitrum ecosystem, this role champions efficiency, transparency, and community engagement. Beyond alignment, it functions as a catalyst for promoting inclusivity, collaboration, and sound decision-making within the DAO. Its contribution extends far beyond a mere supportive role, actively enriching the governance structure with a commitment to positive evolution and the empowerment of community members.
Any person, group of persons or entity can play the role of facilitator.
The steps to select the Facilitator are as follows:
Note:
Experience and Education
Operational Support:
Support and Onboarding:
Advisory and Process:
Given that the Facilitator role is new and experimental, its initial duration will be 6 months from the start of its duties. At the end of this period, the DAO will decide through a Snapshot vote whether to renew the position.
After 6 months of service:
The budget allocated for the Facilitator is 60,000 ARB tokens, which translates into a monthly allocation of 10000 ARB.
The Facilitator should be paid through a proposal in Tally that they should bring with them along with the tasks and accomplishments for the month. This should be done on a month to month basis for 6 months.
The Facilitator has the right to submit their resignation with one month's prior notice, justifying their reasons in a forum post. In such a case, they will be compensated up to their last month of service. If there are surplus funds, these will be returned to the ArbitrumDAO treasury.
ArbitrumDAO retains the authority to dismiss the Facilitator under the following circumstances:
The dismissal process involves a Snapshot vote, and any remaining funds are to be returned to the ArbitrumDAO treasury.
Moreover, the Arbitrum Foundation and other Facilitators can initiate the Facilitator's dismissal through a forum post, outlining the reasons. In such cases, ArbitrumDAO is required to take immediate action.
In any scenario involving the reporting or requested dismissal of the Facilitator, a temporary suspension from all tasks and functions will be enforced until the matter is resolved or clarified.
Being an experimental role, the Facilitator is expected to be adaptable to changes emerging from the evolution of ArbitrumDAO. Additionally, the DAO might require the execution of specific tasks or add responsibilities, as long as they are reasonable and consistent.
Note:
60,000 ARB.
This proposal gathers the comments of several delegates, contributors and discussions that took place in the different groups. We thank @Boardroom and @Sebix for their contributions to this proposal.
We propose integrating the Governance Facilitator role into the DAO, outlining its selection process and guidelines.
In the post [RFC-3] Introduction of a new role in governance - Governance Facilitator, we emphasized the importance of introducing the Facilitator within the DAO. Their presence will boost governance growth, streamline the DAO's internal processes, and foster more dynamic communication with the Arbitrum Foundation. To achieve this effectively, it is essential to set a rigorous selection criteria and define the initial guidelines governing the Facilitator's activities within ArbitrumDAO.
The escalating activity within ArbitrumDAO underscores the imperative for a specialized role akin to that of a Facilitator. This role has been successfully implemented in analogous governance frameworks, yielding favorable outcomes.
Recent discussions in the forum and subsequent proposals have underscored the necessity for a role dedicated to expediting the establishment of frameworks and processes within ArbitrumDAO. The primary aim is to ensure that governance can effectively institute these processes, thereby fostering the continued growth and success of Arbitrum.
The Governance Facilitator position is poised to play a pivotal role in shaping the trajectory of ArbitrumDAO's governance. Aligned with the fundamental principles of the Arbitrum ecosystem, this role champions efficiency, transparency, and community engagement. Beyond alignment, it functions as a catalyst for promoting inclusivity, collaboration, and sound decision-making within the DAO. Its contribution extends far beyond a mere supportive role, actively enriching the governance structure with a commitment to positive evolution and the empowerment of community members.
Any person, group of persons or entity can play the role of facilitator.
The steps to select the Facilitator are as follows:
Note:
Experience and Education
Operational Support:
Support and Onboarding:
Advisory and Process:
Given that the Facilitator role is new and experimental, its initial duration will be 6 months from the start of its duties. At the end of this period, the DAO will decide through a Snapshot vote whether to renew the position.
After 6 months of service:
The budget allocated for the Facilitator is 60,000 ARB tokens, which translates into a monthly allocation of 10000 ARB.
The Facilitator should be paid through a proposal in Tally that they should bring with them along with the tasks and accomplishments for the month. This should be done on a month to month basis for 6 months.
The Facilitator has the right to submit their resignation with one month's prior notice, justifying their reasons in a forum post. In such a case, they will be compensated up to their last month of service. If there are surplus funds, these will be returned to the ArbitrumDAO treasury.
ArbitrumDAO retains the authority to dismiss the Facilitator under the following circumstances:
The dismissal process involves a Snapshot vote, and any remaining funds are to be returned to the ArbitrumDAO treasury.
Moreover, the Arbitrum Foundation and other Facilitators can initiate the Facilitator's dismissal through a forum post, outlining the reasons. In such cases, ArbitrumDAO is required to take immediate action.
In any scenario involving the reporting or requested dismissal of the Facilitator, a temporary suspension from all tasks and functions will be enforced until the matter is resolved or clarified.
Being an experimental role, the Facilitator is expected to be adaptable to changes emerging from the evolution of ArbitrumDAO. Additionally, the DAO might require the execution of specific tasks or add responsibilities, as long as they are reasonable and consistent.
Note:
60,000 ARB.
GM @cattin! Thank you for such a thorough description of your proposal. I wanted to quickly ask how would you say this is different from the work @DisruptionJoe and @ZER8 are doing at Plurality Labs. What would you say are the differences and similarities? Thanks for your time :slight_smile:
Hi, Arbitrum community! I know I'm new around but I would like share some of my experience regarding the Maker governance. The Governance Facilitator role is crucial to any DAO, directly affecting community cohesion, prompting healthy debates and ensuring effective decision-making. There are some core responsibilities and aspects that the community had in consideration when defining the role at Maker that could be taken into account. In order to keep my answer from being too long, I summarized and adapted these concepts to Arbitrum in this document for the community.
Also, I believe the election process is very important. At Maker, the GovAlpha Core Unit has recently been offboarded by its Facilitators, and the search for new Reserve Facilitators for the Governance Scope prompted some really interesting excercises for candidates (made by a former GovAlpha Facilitator) that could come in handy when defining an election process. You can find these Governance Exercises here.
Hi, Arbitrum community! I know I'm new around but I would like share some of my experience regarding the Maker governance. The Governance Facilitator role is crucial to any DAO, directly affecting community cohesion, prompting healthy debates and ensuring effective decision-making. There are some core responsibilities and aspects that the community had in consideration when defining the role at Maker that could be taken into account. In order to keep my answer from being too long, I summarized and adapted these concepts to Arbitrum in this document for the community.
Also, I believe the election process is very important. At Maker, the GovAlpha Core Unit has recently been offboarded by its Facilitators, and the search for new Reserve Facilitators for the Governance Scope prompted some really interesting excercises for candidates (made by a former GovAlpha Facilitator) that could come in handy when defining an election process. You can find these Governance Exercises here.
I hope this info helps to define what the Arbitrum community wants and expects from this role in the DAO.
GM @cattin! Thank you for such a thorough description of your proposal. I wanted to quickly ask how would you say this is different from the work @DisruptionJoe and @ZER8 are doing at Plurality Labs. What would you say are the differences and similarities? Thanks for your time :slight_smile:
Hi, Arbitrum community! I know I'm new around but I would like share some of my experience regarding the Maker governance. The Governance Facilitator role is crucial to any DAO, directly affecting community cohesion, prompting healthy debates and ensuring effective decision-making. There are some core responsibilities and aspects that the community had in consideration when defining the role at Maker that could be taken into account. In order to keep my answer from being too long, I summarized and adapted these concepts to Arbitrum in this document for the community.
Also, I believe the election process is very important. At Maker, the GovAlpha Core Unit has recently been offboarded by its Facilitators, and the search for new Reserve Facilitators for the Governance Scope prompted some really interesting excercises for candidates (made by a former GovAlpha Facilitator) that could come in handy when defining an election process. You can find these Governance Exercises here.
Hi, Arbitrum community! I know I'm new around but I would like share some of my experience regarding the Maker governance. The Governance Facilitator role is crucial to any DAO, directly affecting community cohesion, prompting healthy debates and ensuring effective decision-making. There are some core responsibilities and aspects that the community had in consideration when defining the role at Maker that could be taken into account. In order to keep my answer from being too long, I summarized and adapted these concepts to Arbitrum in this document for the community.
Also, I believe the election process is very important. At Maker, the GovAlpha Core Unit has recently been offboarded by its Facilitators, and the search for new Reserve Facilitators for the Governance Scope prompted some really interesting excercises for candidates (made by a former GovAlpha Facilitator) that could come in handy when defining an election process. You can find these Governance Exercises here.
I hope this info helps to define what the Arbitrum community wants and expects from this role in the DAO.
We are very lucky to have @cliffton.eth join us at the Arbitrum Foundation. He started with us on Monday and previously he was involved in the governance efforts for the dYdX DAO.
The above role covers a lot of his responsibilities already. His primary focus is DAO governance which includes helping to establish procedures/processes to assist with DAO decision making and supporting all proposals as a neutral party. Hopefully we'll see his work start to play out over the coming weeks.
We are very lucky to have @cliffton.eth join us at the Arbitrum Foundation. He started with us on Monday and previously he was involved in the governance efforts for the dYdX DAO.
The above role covers a lot of his responsibilities already. His primary focus is DAO governance which includes helping to establish procedures/processes to assist with DAO decision making and supporting all proposals as a neutral party. Hopefully we'll see his work start to play out over the coming weeks.
It may still be a good idea for the DAO to appoint governance facilitators too. I don't have a strong opinion on this. It'll be good to work out the current bottlenecks to governance and whether the above type of role will help resolve it.
We are very lucky to have @cliffton.eth join us at the Arbitrum Foundation. He started with us on Monday and previously he was involved in the governance efforts for the dYdX DAO.
The above role covers a lot of his responsibilities already. His primary focus is DAO governance which includes helping to establish procedures/processes to assist with DAO decision making and supporting all proposals as a neutral party. Hopefully we'll see his work start to play out over the coming weeks.
We are very lucky to have @cliffton.eth join us at the Arbitrum Foundation. He started with us on Monday and previously he was involved in the governance efforts for the dYdX DAO.
The above role covers a lot of his responsibilities already. His primary focus is DAO governance which includes helping to establish procedures/processes to assist with DAO decision making and supporting all proposals as a neutral party. Hopefully we'll see his work start to play out over the coming weeks.
It may still be a good idea for the DAO to appoint governance facilitators too. I don't have a strong opinion on this. It'll be good to work out the current bottlenecks to governance and whether the above type of role will help resolve it.
Hello everyone thank you for your responses and sorry for the delay in replying. I will answer the questions:
Hello everyone thank you for your responses and sorry for the delay in replying. I will answer the questions:
Thank you for such a thorough description of your proposal. I wanted to quickly ask how would you say this is different from the work @DisruptionJoe and @ZER8 are doing at Plurality Labs.
What would you say are the differences and similarities? Thanks for your time
What we are proposing is an exclusive DAO role that should respect the will of the DAO, follow up on governance processes and facilitate communication with Arbitrum Foundation. While the work they’ve made so far has been amazing, it’s quite different to this role since what Plurality Labs is currently doing arises from this proposal: https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/aip-3-non-constitutional-fund-the-arbitrum-grants-framework-proposal-milestone-1/14976 in which they commit to develop their grants programs - unless they are . To give you a rough idea, this role is similar to the role of the Advocate that was proposed in the Arbitrum Coalition proposal, but as mentioned before, the role of the facilitator is exclusive to the DAO and should not respond to other interests.
Thanks Cattin, in addition to the question above. Are there any suggestions for KPIs and MoSs for this role?
We have not assigned KPIs or any other metrics or control measures, the person filling the role must be a problem solver who serves the DAO and is able to execute tasks autonomously. As time progresses between the DAO and the facilitators they should put these measures in place or as more facilitators join. We believe that at this stage of the ArbitrumDAO we need people really experienced in this position to give it the vision that the DAO intends.
I suggest doing this via QV to reduce the influence of plutocracy
This can be evaluated, it depends on the governance if you want a vote via QV, or maybe using private voting too (as it was suggested once for the security council).
Maybe guarantee a lower bound on the USD/ARB Rate because I have seen circumstances in the past where contributors paid in native tokens will walk away if PA is negative and they no longer deem it worth their time.
Completely agree here, we could set the remuneration to USD valuation and have it paid monthly through voting. Considering that it is a very important role, it could make sense to have it in USD to give some predictability.
Maybe add a 6-month bonus paid in vesting tokens if the DAO votes to continue the agreement past the initial 6-month period. So, as the contributor continues to meet/exceed expectations, their efforts can be rewarded. Will also attract talent that is considering leaving a current role for this.
Excellent idea we can add this to the proposal.
Think for the initial sprint; start with a minimum of two facilitator roles with complementary skills, backup capability in the event one is away, and for redundancy purposes.
We thought so too, but we wanted to hear from the community if they thought more than one facilitator was needed.
Depending on the facilitator’s career experience, they may struggle if overwhelmed with too much work, how can we determine we need another facilitator ASAP to cover growing demand, who specifically is the facilitator accountable to if challenged with multiple competing priorities and needs assistance challenging what they can currently support without introducing bias. Who, if anyone, should provide the facilitator with regular feedback on progress and deliverables? Using the forum for constructive criticism can be both valuable and challenging at times, as we have seen here in the past.
It is difficult to determine what is the exact number of facilitators needed. Perhaps we should have faster selection processes or standby facilitators with less time load that, when needed they are paid extra as long as they accomplish the task. Following up on the questions, the facilitator should be accountable to the DAO, it should be autonomous, and keep records of their daily activities and tasks, anyone in the DAO should be able to monitor what the facilitator is doing. I think an example we have today is @Matt_StableLab, who notifies the DAO daily about what is happening with the STIPs, and what problems they face and maintains communication with the protocols, the DAO, and the foundation.
Thanks Cattin, in addition to the question above. Are there any suggestions for KPIs and MoSs for this role?
Voting: Once the nomination period ends, a proposal will be presented on Snapshot with the list of candidates, allowing the DAO to select the candidate that best meets their expectations and needs.
Thanks Cattin, in addition to the question above. Are there any suggestions for KPIs and MoSs for this role?
Voting: Once the nomination period ends, a proposal will be presented on Snapshot with the list of candidates, allowing the DAO to select the candidate that best meets their expectations and needs.
However, if we elect an individual or an entity from the DAO to assume the role, they might have too much control depending on what their responsibility and authority is. We need clear outline of the facilitator’s responsibilities and powers, as well as a process to remove them, should it be required.
However, if we elect an individual or an entity from the DAO to assume the role, they might have too much control depending on what their responsibility and authority is. We need clear outline of the facilitator’s responsibilities and powers, as well as a process to remove them, should it be required.
We agree on this point.
The @seedlatam delegation led by @cattin has been working on this Draft for the selection of the Facilitator. This document is public and anyone can leave comments:
We understand that this is a sensitive position for the DAO and there must be certain considerations as you mention. We have also been talking with @cliffton.eth who has just started his duties as Facilitator. If anything we don't want to duplicate efforts and create a double expense for the DAO.
We would also like to know if it is important for the DAO to have a facilitator role. As you can see we have not received many comments.
Also, I believe the election process is very important. At Maker, the GovAlpha Core Unit has recently been offboarded by its Facilitators, and the search for new Reserve Facilitators for the Governance Scope prompted some really interesting excercises for candidates (made by a former GovAlpha Facilitator) that could come in handy when defining an election process. You can find these Governance Exercises here .
I hope this info helps to define what the Arbitrum community wants and expects from this role in the DAO.
Our proposal is based on the MakerDAO facilitator role, although there are some differences.
Part of the @seedlatam team working on MakerDAO's SOFI AVC has collaborated on the above draft. Special thanks to @pedrob who reviewed the draft.
We also had a chat with one of Descentraland's facilitators to learn more about the role and its tasks. You can watch a talk from him about the role in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WOof_NFGBg
Note: @cattin is traveling, so I am responding in his place.
LFG, we need this.
A few comments/ideas:
LFG, we need this.
A few comments/ideas:
Regardless, let's do it and course correct while it's in flight, nothing that can't be solved once the ball is rolling amongst a peer group of delegates/foundation members/and active participants. Just thinking forward on potential issues based on past experiences.
This is an interesting proposal to say the least. While I do see the need for such a role, @stonecoldpat seems to be playing this at the moment, maybe I am wrong, but I hope he comments here to tell us a bit about the role he's playing from the foundation side.
On another note, the responsibility of this role needs to be well scoped out similar to the examples which have been listed here from other DAOs. The current scope seems insufficient to need a new role. Finally, we should avoid staging plutocratic popularity contests to select for roles which must be filled by members with skills.
I 100% agree with this take, maybe the simplest way to address this would be to have the foundation propose a facilitator or team of facilitators, and the DAO votes to approve/reject them. I would also like to see what @stonecoldpat thinks about this since I've also seen him as the bridge between the DAO and the foundation, but it might be useful to have a more defined role, specially as the DAO grows.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
While we are aware of the challenges introducing such a role to the DAO has, we are also skeptical of the ability of the DAO to efficiently coordinate and move initiatives forward at this time without someone actively coordinating efforts.
Hello everyone thank you for your responses and sorry for the delay in replying. I will answer the questions:
Hello everyone thank you for your responses and sorry for the delay in replying. I will answer the questions:
Thank you for such a thorough description of your proposal. I wanted to quickly ask how would you say this is different from the work @DisruptionJoe and @ZER8 are doing at Plurality Labs.
What would you say are the differences and similarities? Thanks for your time
What we are proposing is an exclusive DAO role that should respect the will of the DAO, follow up on governance processes and facilitate communication with Arbitrum Foundation. While the work they’ve made so far has been amazing, it’s quite different to this role since what Plurality Labs is currently doing arises from this proposal: https://forum.arbitrum.foundation/t/aip-3-non-constitutional-fund-the-arbitrum-grants-framework-proposal-milestone-1/14976 in which they commit to develop their grants programs - unless they are . To give you a rough idea, this role is similar to the role of the Advocate that was proposed in the Arbitrum Coalition proposal, but as mentioned before, the role of the facilitator is exclusive to the DAO and should not respond to other interests.
Thanks Cattin, in addition to the question above. Are there any suggestions for KPIs and MoSs for this role?
We have not assigned KPIs or any other metrics or control measures, the person filling the role must be a problem solver who serves the DAO and is able to execute tasks autonomously. As time progresses between the DAO and the facilitators they should put these measures in place or as more facilitators join. We believe that at this stage of the ArbitrumDAO we need people really experienced in this position to give it the vision that the DAO intends.
I suggest doing this via QV to reduce the influence of plutocracy
This can be evaluated, it depends on the governance if you want a vote via QV, or maybe using private voting too (as it was suggested once for the security council).
Maybe guarantee a lower bound on the USD/ARB Rate because I have seen circumstances in the past where contributors paid in native tokens will walk away if PA is negative and they no longer deem it worth their time.
Completely agree here, we could set the remuneration to USD valuation and have it paid monthly through voting. Considering that it is a very important role, it could make sense to have it in USD to give some predictability.
Maybe add a 6-month bonus paid in vesting tokens if the DAO votes to continue the agreement past the initial 6-month period. So, as the contributor continues to meet/exceed expectations, their efforts can be rewarded. Will also attract talent that is considering leaving a current role for this.
Excellent idea we can add this to the proposal.
Think for the initial sprint; start with a minimum of two facilitator roles with complementary skills, backup capability in the event one is away, and for redundancy purposes.
We thought so too, but we wanted to hear from the community if they thought more than one facilitator was needed.
Depending on the facilitator’s career experience, they may struggle if overwhelmed with too much work, how can we determine we need another facilitator ASAP to cover growing demand, who specifically is the facilitator accountable to if challenged with multiple competing priorities and needs assistance challenging what they can currently support without introducing bias. Who, if anyone, should provide the facilitator with regular feedback on progress and deliverables? Using the forum for constructive criticism can be both valuable and challenging at times, as we have seen here in the past.
It is difficult to determine what is the exact number of facilitators needed. Perhaps we should have faster selection processes or standby facilitators with less time load that, when needed they are paid extra as long as they accomplish the task. Following up on the questions, the facilitator should be accountable to the DAO, it should be autonomous, and keep records of their daily activities and tasks, anyone in the DAO should be able to monitor what the facilitator is doing. I think an example we have today is @Matt_StableLab, who notifies the DAO daily about what is happening with the STIPs, and what problems they face and maintains communication with the protocols, the DAO, and the foundation.
Thanks Cattin, in addition to the question above. Are there any suggestions for KPIs and MoSs for this role?
Voting: Once the nomination period ends, a proposal will be presented on Snapshot with the list of candidates, allowing the DAO to select the candidate that best meets their expectations and needs.
Thanks Cattin, in addition to the question above. Are there any suggestions for KPIs and MoSs for this role?
Voting: Once the nomination period ends, a proposal will be presented on Snapshot with the list of candidates, allowing the DAO to select the candidate that best meets their expectations and needs.
However, if we elect an individual or an entity from the DAO to assume the role, they might have too much control depending on what their responsibility and authority is. We need clear outline of the facilitator’s responsibilities and powers, as well as a process to remove them, should it be required.
However, if we elect an individual or an entity from the DAO to assume the role, they might have too much control depending on what their responsibility and authority is. We need clear outline of the facilitator’s responsibilities and powers, as well as a process to remove them, should it be required.
We agree on this point.
The @seedlatam delegation led by @cattin has been working on this Draft for the selection of the Facilitator. This document is public and anyone can leave comments:
We understand that this is a sensitive position for the DAO and there must be certain considerations as you mention. We have also been talking with @cliffton.eth who has just started his duties as Facilitator. If anything we don't want to duplicate efforts and create a double expense for the DAO.
We would also like to know if it is important for the DAO to have a facilitator role. As you can see we have not received many comments.
Also, I believe the election process is very important. At Maker, the GovAlpha Core Unit has recently been offboarded by its Facilitators, and the search for new Reserve Facilitators for the Governance Scope prompted some really interesting excercises for candidates (made by a former GovAlpha Facilitator) that could come in handy when defining an election process. You can find these Governance Exercises here .
I hope this info helps to define what the Arbitrum community wants and expects from this role in the DAO.
Our proposal is based on the MakerDAO facilitator role, although there are some differences.
Part of the @seedlatam team working on MakerDAO's SOFI AVC has collaborated on the above draft. Special thanks to @pedrob who reviewed the draft.
We also had a chat with one of Descentraland's facilitators to learn more about the role and its tasks. You can watch a talk from him about the role in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WOof_NFGBg
Note: @cattin is traveling, so I am responding in his place.
LFG, we need this.
A few comments/ideas:
LFG, we need this.
A few comments/ideas:
Regardless, let's do it and course correct while it's in flight, nothing that can't be solved once the ball is rolling amongst a peer group of delegates/foundation members/and active participants. Just thinking forward on potential issues based on past experiences.
This is an interesting proposal to say the least. While I do see the need for such a role, @stonecoldpat seems to be playing this at the moment, maybe I am wrong, but I hope he comments here to tell us a bit about the role he's playing from the foundation side.
On another note, the responsibility of this role needs to be well scoped out similar to the examples which have been listed here from other DAOs. The current scope seems insufficient to need a new role. Finally, we should avoid staging plutocratic popularity contests to select for roles which must be filled by members with skills.
I 100% agree with this take, maybe the simplest way to address this would be to have the foundation propose a facilitator or team of facilitators, and the DAO votes to approve/reject them. I would also like to see what @stonecoldpat thinks about this since I've also seen him as the bridge between the DAO and the foundation, but it might be useful to have a more defined role, specially as the DAO grows.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
While we are aware of the challenges introducing such a role to the DAO has, we are also skeptical of the ability of the DAO to efficiently coordinate and move initiatives forward at this time without someone actively coordinating efforts.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
While we are aware of the challenges introducing such a role to the DAO has, we are also skeptical of the ability of the DAO to efficiently coordinate and move initiatives forward at this time without someone actively coordinating efforts.
We're afraid that if the role of the Governance Facilitator is expected to be taken up by someone at the Foundation, then instead of empowering the DAO, we’re actually delegating more authority and control over to the Foundation. We believe that such a role should be handled by someone elected from the DAO, working closely with @cliffton.eth on the Foundation side.
However, if we elect an individual or an entity from the DAO to assume the role, they might have too much control depending on what their responsibility and authority is. We need clear outline of the facilitator’s responsibilities and powers, as well as a process to remove them, should it be required.
Overall, we'd be supportive of such a proposal, provided there's a detailed outline of the scope of responsibilities and procedures with which the DAO can manage this role.
The below response reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking and ideation of the two.
While we are aware of the challenges introducing such a role to the DAO has, we are also skeptical of the ability of the DAO to efficiently coordinate and move initiatives forward at this time without someone actively coordinating efforts.
We're afraid that if the role of the Governance Facilitator is expected to be taken up by someone at the Foundation, then instead of empowering the DAO, we’re actually delegating more authority and control over to the Foundation. We believe that such a role should be handled by someone elected from the DAO, working closely with @cliffton.eth on the Foundation side.
However, if we elect an individual or an entity from the DAO to assume the role, they might have too much control depending on what their responsibility and authority is. We need clear outline of the facilitator’s responsibilities and powers, as well as a process to remove them, should it be required.
Overall, we'd be supportive of such a proposal, provided there's a detailed outline of the scope of responsibilities and procedures with which the DAO can manage this role.
