🤝🏽 SIP Establishing a SandFam-elected "Community Council"

[rocksymiguel]

@sebga

From the beginning this has always been a problem for me.
I consider hiding conversations (from everyone) to be an insult to our intelligence and a lack of respect for everyone.

I understand and share @sebga perspective on the term “Closed-Door.” In Spanish, this expression is often associated with negative connotations, such as hidden activities, deceit, or lack of transparency. So maybe that could be our problem? Idk.
While I recognize that privacy is necessary, phrases like this can create distrust, especially when transparency with the community is essential.

The main goal of this proposal, in my view, is to find a community member to act as a bridge between the community and the DAO Team, which is excellent. However, including terms like “Closed-Door” leaves room for negative interpretations, particularly given the lack of transparency perceived in the ecosystem.

I don’t think it’s necessary to specify whether meetings are private or not. For example, a CC, once a month, report back from the community to you on Diggin in the SAND and we all see what you think about it as CM, what things are being worked on and things like that. This would foster trust and transparency.

If we choose a CC that truly represents the community’s interests, private meetings shouldn’t be an issue, as long as they are clearly reported from the CC to the DAO. However, as a native Spanish speaker, reading terms like “Closed-Door” can naturally evoke suspicion or doubt.

---

Closed-Door = SUS, and I would vote NO if something feel suspicious for me

[theKuntaMC]

@rocksymiguel

I don’t think it’s necessary to specify whether meetings are private or not. For example, a CC, once a month, reports back from the community to you on Diggin in the SAND and we all see what you think about it as CM, what things are being worked on, and things like that. This would foster trust and transparency.

If we choose a CC that truly represents the community’s interests, private meetings shouldn’t be an issue, as long as they are reported from the CC to the DAO. However, as a native Spanish speaker, reading terms like “Closed-Door” can naturally evoke suspicion or doubt.

Thanks for this comment. I had not even thought about the cultural interpretations of the phrase “closed-door” when I included it.

Note: that phrase was removed. V2 of CC SIP will be posted tomorrow.

Also, great idea to have one or a few members of the CC on the DitS podcast once a month to report to the community!! Even if they can only record segments for me to include, that would be very valuable for everyone.

Coupled with clear reporting coming from both Admin Team + the CC, there should be a lot of transparency.

All that said, if people want recordings, we can accommodate that most of the time, too. When the CC is seated, they will influence decisions like this much more than me.

[theKuntaMC]

Aligning the schedules and time zones of Admin Team members and our co-author is taking longer than expected and the weekend break doesn’t help.

We will be extending the CC nomination period for an additional 2 weeks (to Feb. 5th) and delaying the next version of this SIP until next week.

I know I said we’d drop v2 today, but I shouldn’t have promised a date when we didn’t have the revisions call finalized.

Please know that we are working diligently to incorporate the feedback we’ve received from all community members in the most impactful way for our collective future success!

In the meantime, consider nominating yourself or others from the community for the CC & redirect some of your energy to other important discussions on the Forum.

Touch some grass this weekend, and count every day as a blessing, SandFam.

[sebga]

It’s true that finding the limit is not easy. If we are talking about development and strategy this could potentially pose a problem, it was with this aspect in mind that I asked if the CC would have a non-disclosure contract.

I would be in favor of calls concerning the dao being made publicly, for example in a voice room on the TSB discord server dedicated to the dao.

But you may be right, it may not be necessary to record everything.

[AndyRichy]

A little late to the party so some of this may have already been addressed.

I very much like the idea of a community voice being inputted into the DAO but this feels a bit excessive. There are a large list of requests/tasks for the DAO CC to complete each week, making this role more like a demanding unpaid part time job rather then a volunteer position.

It’s frustrating when organizations lean on “passion for the community” as an excuse to pile on responsibilities without recognition.

Do you think the list of demands is reasonable ?

[DrMetaverso]

Honestly, I think the demands/roles & responsibilities are reasonable only if the position is compensated. I believe that’s the consensus around here.
I agree with you that the scope of work is too much for voluntary work. The member would likely burn out and lose motivation after a while!

[Lanzer]

@AndyRichy @DrMetaverso Just to clear Kunta’s name…I was the one who so far said we shouldn’t compensate CC because I’m a coauthor and didn’t want to be seen as putting in compensation for myself when I knew I was going to self-nominate.

It felt self-serving and a little unethical.

Also…I want to avoid any accusation of being in it for the money or perception of being on the DAO Admin Team’s payroll, because the community’s trust is key to the CC’s success.

But you’re totally right, I think CC members should be compensated for their time…I’m having trouble trying to find a middle ground on this.

[Lanzer]

@rocksymiguel

In Spanish, this expression is often associated with negative connotations

Wow, I had no idea, thank you Rocksy! That was very valuable to know

[theKuntaMC]

@AndyRichy

Do you think the list of demands is reasonable?

The next version of the SIP will make it clearer that the “checklist for success” is not mandatory (or a list of demands). It’s an overview of suggestions that could help them be more successful.

Others have voiced that concern, too. Makes sense.

If/when there is a SIP that suggests remuneration for the CC, as per the discussion of others above, people will more likely expect job requirements.

Like all roles written into existence like this, the CC roles will likely operationalize a bit differently than anticipated by most. Further, not every CC member will end up doing the same thing. This makes it hard to define with great clarity going into it. Thus, the suggestive checklist for success.

[theKuntaMC]

an UPDATED version of the CC SIP has now been posted!

Using the edit function, I overwrote the original post in this thread with an updated version that was developed based on community feedback and that of the DAO’s legal team.

Specifically, the legal advice was that if we make any role redundant with a role that was written into the constitution (ie, making formal recommendations on SIPs) it could cause future legal problems. Nothing would stop any CC member (or a group of them) from making recommendations in some capacity, however.

@cryptodiplo @KCL @DAO @hishmad @Biversen @moefat @rocksymiguel @sebga @Airvey @meowl @mo_ezz14 @Oldwon @Lanzer @PickaxeMaster @AndyRichy and anyone else who contributed to this conversation constructively who I may be forgetting!

Any questions or suggestions are now invited again!

We may refine this one last time before it’s in condition to go to vote.

REMINDER: we need more candidates! Consider being a CC member if you’re reading this. Or think about who would be great and nominate them! See the new additions to the SIP regarding nominating other people and the 30-day grace period for candidates who want to give up other roles to join the CC.