Thanks for this comment. I had not even thought about the cultural interpretations of the phrase âclosed-doorâ 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.
Aligning the schedules and time zones of Admin Team members and our co-author is taking longer than expected and the weekend break doesnât 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 weâd drop v2 today, but I shouldnât have promised a date when we didnât have the revisions call finalized.
Please know that we are working diligently to incorporate the feedback weâve 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.
Itâs 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.
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.
Itâs frustrating when organizations lean on âpassion for the communityâ as an excuse to pile on responsibilities without recognition.
Honestly, I think the demands/roles & responsibilities are reasonable only if the position is compensated. I believe thatâs 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!
@AndyRichy@DrMetaverso Just to clear Kuntaâs nameâŚI was the one who so far said we shouldnât compensate CC because Iâm a coauthor and didnât 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.
AlsoâŚI want to avoid any accusation of being in it for the money or perception of being on the DAO Admin Teamâs payroll, because the communityâs trust is key to the CCâs success.
But youâre totally right, I think CC members should be compensated for their timeâŚIâm having trouble trying to find a middle ground on this.
The next version of the SIP will make it clearer that the âchecklist for successâ is not mandatory (or a list of demands). Itâs 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.
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 DAOâs 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.
Any questions or suggestions are now invited again!
We may refine this one last time before itâs in condition to go to vote.
REMINDER: we need more candidates! Consider being a CC member if youâre 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.
I have a question for the authors of this SIP or the DAO Admin Team, if/when this SIP goes to a vote, what would the options to cast our vote are going to be, and who sets those options?
The question of @rocksymiguel is headed to the same question as for the UGC. Should we first vote yes or no for CC creation? I think not BUT⌠if there is only one running candidate out of 5 expected shoudl we start a vote?
If the SIP is released for voting the possibilites for answers should reflect that eg:
candidate A
candidate B
candidate C
candidate X
This SIP is not required in that format
If 5 has more than 50% of total voting SIP should not pass.
PS: If there is only 1 running candidate I am just calling out those people that were very loud to complain about the lack of community members representation to apply. But at the end i am not surprised because you know what, if we would have put some money behind that position I am sure that those same people barking would have apply.
PS2: Continuing my thinking process at the end if there is only one applicant with @Lanzer letâs just elect him. I am sure he will do nicely the job. (disclaimer: I did vote no on SANDDAO podcast )
PS3/ @Lanzer man thank you for posting the 3h30 video on foundation https://youtu.be/FYN12BqShTU. I had the impression I can be a lawyer now after this online course. Thanks man learned a lot.
More than that, I think an option for latecomers.
I believe that according to all the discussions here in the forum, a SIP can advance or not, the SIP Process for me is clear, simple and straightforward and that none of these processes have been skipped.
But something that I recognize is that most of the people that I contact do not participate in the forum until it is already being voted on, even though I encourage them to do so from the beginning.
This SIP may come to a vote as it has been proposed (candidates as options), but people will come (with good reason), who did not know about this SIP or who did not want to participate in the discussion, saying, where I vote NO against this proposal. This may not be the case, but it may still happen in some other proposal in the future.
People asking and arguing where is the NO button.
And yeah my votes are going to be send it to @Lanzer already
Hahahahaha why thank you for that very painful disclaimer
Glad to! I loved doing that episode. I have parts 2 and 3 happening tomorrow. Got a few lawyers coming on the show to give their thoughts on foundation companies. Iâll end it with part 4, a read through of our docs.
Im just going to take CC SIP as an example, im not against it.
If a proposal is truly compelling and addresses a clear need, it will naturally attract attention, we all have seen that in the past. However, when a proposal doesnât gain interest, itâs likely a reflection of the proposal itself rather than other factors, like lack of communication about this proposal, etc.
Many in the community feel that if thereâs no engagement early on, the SIP might not be worth advancing to a vote. Interest canât be forced, it needs to resonate with the community.
Using the CC SIP as an example (but applying this generally to any proposal, again is just an example, im not againts this SIP ), I can imagine scenarios where members, upon seeing this SIP up to vote, ask:
âWhen did we vote to establish a CC in the first place?â
âWhy am I going to vote for it if it is the responsibility of the SC or AB to do what they are asking a CC to do?â
This isnât about this SIP specifically but highlights a general sentiment that could arise in future proposals.
To address this, I think adding an Against option alongside Abstain could help.
It ensures even a small percentage of the community has a way to express disagreement. Our goal shouldnât just be passing SIPs but fostering meaningful participation and ensuring everyone feels heard.
Again Im not against this SIP ( please believe me ), and I also think itâs a little off the topic of the proposal, but it could be useful for this and/or future SIPs.
Might I suggest 2? I struggle to think of what 3 should accomplish that 2 could not, and while I appreciate the âitâll be too hardâ perspective, I for one willingly take on the responsibilities and we donât even know how it will play out yet until we try.
I mean, I would LOVE to be compensation, and I see others suggesting itâŚbut I donât feel itâs right for me to suggest it as both coauthor and declared nominee. If Kunta adds it, I wonât exercise coauthor veto. I feel really uncomfortable about itâŚbut maybe thatâs what is needed to get a second candidate to nominate themselves.
HmmâŚI always figured that was the reason for the SIP process. Someone in TSB ecosystem thinks we should do X, puts up a SIP, and the community then votes if they think X should be done or not.
The details of the CC SIP spell out the reason for it. If we require a vote before weâre able to voteâŚI feel like we give ourselves too much room to do nothing while taking too long to keep doing nothing.
Iâd be willing to have one of the options be âWe should not have a Community Councilâ would that do it @rocksymiguel ?
I agree. I think we should word it as âWe should not have a CCâ and if it reaches 50%, the SIP does not pass.
Touch some grass this weekend, and count every day as a blessing, SandFam.
an UPDATED version of the CC SIP has now been posted!
Any questions or suggestions are now invited again!
)
please believe me 
I mean, I would LOVE to be compensation, and I see others suggesting itâŚbut I donât feel itâs right for me to suggest it as both coauthor and declared nominee. If Kunta adds it, I wonât exercise coauthor veto. I feel really uncomfortable about itâŚbut maybe thatâs what is needed to get a second candidate to nominate themselves.