⭕ [RFC] mStableDAO Restructure Proposal

Excellent points from both sides.

I think the 10 hours/month for both Discord and Forum is to incentivize participation. Of course we’re not going to track if you spend 10 hours per month across these two platforms, but since we’re working on them daily, it’s easy to spot who spends zero time, and who is engaged here and there.

Thinking of this as some sort of goal to strife towards, and if it ends up being 5 hours, nobody will hang, but the non-participation on either platforms as a core contributor is definitely no longer happening.

I see it as a gentleman’s agreement to participate in the best way you can across the month, and if no involvement happens at all, then the DAO will have a problem, otherwise it’ll all be gucci.

Please remember that if everyone signs within the 24 hours but stays otherwise outside of any governance in mStable, we’re simply re-creating the old structure, but under a new hood.

We do not encourage nor wish anyone to sign up to simply sign transactions. You also wouldn’t want to hire an office worker to simply have him or her boot up their computer once per day and check the emails to find open docusign contracts to sign, sign them, and log off again for the rest of the day :sweat_smile:

hi everyone and Happy Friday! :innocent:

TDP 45 has successfully made it onto the forums, and please be so kind as to redirect any further election-related comments and feedback there!

From here on, we will use this RFC thread to Discuss the consolidation of the GrantsDAO and the Community subDAO in preparation for TDP 46.

As most of you know my stance towards this movement, I’ll spare you any redundant comments, and hope that we can get an exciting talk going regard this, similar to the previous 2 sessions!

Many thanks to all for their continued feedback and support, and wishing you a great start into this weekend! :sunglasses: :+1:

Thanks @mZeroNine . To kick of the discussion around the consolidation of the Community subDAO and GrantsDAO, I’ll share some thoughts:

  • As @mZeroNine hinted at, this topic was raised previously but not pursued due to a lack of consensus in the forum and Governance call.
  • I think it is well worth reviewing now in the context of the wider review of the DAO structure and processes, and also in light of the 1st year of approved GrantsDAO funding coming to an end.
  • This should be a chance to review how the mStable Grants program has performed and what changes should be made going forward, as well as the benefits of consolidating these entities.

My Opinions

  • Given the current MTA price and the limits that puts on funding, mStable should be conservative with spending on grants in general

  • Grants funded at this time should show promise of a clear return on investment to the protocol (ie. more of an investment that a grant)

  • For any related products or features built through grants, there should be clear communication with core mStable contributors to ensure that code can be maintained and offer long-term value.

  • I do see value in combining the current GrantsDAO with the current Community subDAO. While there would be some additional overhead in accounting for separate budgets for different use-cases, I think this would be outweighed by the gains from maintaining only a single entity and signer group.

  • We should discuss how signers for the consolidated entity would be selected and considerations for putting together a funding proposal

  • There was some internal discussion on the name of a consolidated entity. Eg. Ecosystem subDAO, Growth subDAO. Perhaps some more suggestions and another poll could help resolve this.

1 Like

I’m in favor of a consolidation. I feel like providing grants is a form of community outreach.

It should be made explicit that @stonp89 will not be resuming his role as the cat-herder. So naturally the question is “does the consolidated structure require a second position? Or does it all fall on the cat-herder for the community DAO?”

For a name, honestly I’m fine with just retaining CommunityDAO. Not least because we bought mstablecommunity.eth and it would be kinda silly to buy something else (although I guess ETH is cheap right now).

I don’t have anything in particular to add about signers. I was asked if I wanted to write stuff (which didn’t end up happening for various reasons) and then it was just convenient for me to volunteer to be a voter/signer. I’m not sure how the signer pool was originally constructed for the GrantsDAO to begin with.

2 Likes

Just voted for this. You all are paving the way to help define DAOs and sub-DAOs.

Well done.

Many thanks for the feedback everyone!

So, from the basic consensus here in the forum it seems that we can pretty much go ahead with the creation of TDP 46 and discuss all other relevant topics there.

Unless someone felt very strongly about this, I’ll go ahead and draft this up for posting in the forum on Friday!

Wishing you a successful start in the day, and thanks everyone for participating in mStable Governance! :sunglasses: :facepunch:

1 Like

Thanks @mZeroNine .

I’ll just note that we should be clear on the timing around when the roles and responsibilities of current GrantsDAO signers should finish up. Given that there are some outstanding matters to resolve there, perhaps signers who receive compensation there should be paid for one or two more weeks, the the multisig officially shut down from mid-July? This should allow a handover period to settle outstanding commitments and build GrantsDAO responsibilities into the Funding Proposal for the new entity.

I’m sure there is plenty more discussion to be had on how the grants program should run and learnings from the last year, but this can be discussed in the TDP post and detailed in the 1st funding proposal for the new entity.

1 Like

I agree with you. I think all of these merging discussions should be part of the funding proposal. If we included them in TDP 46, it will become quite murky in terms of consolidaton vs ways to consolidate.

If we separated them from each other, then we know clearly if Meta Governors wish a consolidation, and then in the actual Funding Request we can discuss the rollout and migration in great detail. What do you think?

1 Like

Happy Monday everyone!

With TDP 46 moved towards a TDP, let’s focus our energy for the next 2 weeks on the overall compensation model & Funding Request Framework for the mStableDAO moving forward (excluding the 1000mUSD/month for the basic signer role).

This discussion should be quite extensive and rich, so I’ve given 2 weeks for this, also based on internal feedback and overall volume and workloads.

In detail, we should find consensus on:

  • Compensation and possible internal election of the Cat Herder of the mStableDAO
  • Compensation and possible internal election for the Ops Signer Roles (the people that queue up transactions on behalf of the TreasuryDAO & ProtocolDAO)
  • Overall Framework on how a subDAO will apply to the mStableDAO for Funding, including overall strategy, timeframe, way of funding (Stream, Upfront etc…), Proof of Work (Milestones, Deliverables, Supervision, Quality Assurance, Quality Control)
  • Anything else we can think of relevant to TDP 47!
1 Like