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

[theKuntaMC]

@DAO

2 years, while it feels long, I’d say its a sweet spot. Considering that the 1st tenure for SC will expire a year from now, its good that we don’t get the timings clash with the next nomination, i.e 2025 will be SC renomination, and 2026 is CC renomination.

We also thought of this… Staggering times of body changes so that elections and governance are less interrupted.

But if the majority here thinks 1 year is a better term limit than 2, we’ll make that change.

[theKuntaMC]

@DAO

1. I think its fair to allow CC members to put up SIPs, for the very reason that they won’t be getting any allocation of VP from TSB. We’ll still need commited members of the community to put up SIPs.
2. As for voting, I think its reasonable to say that CC members Abstain from DIRECTLY voting in their own SIP.

As for whether @Lanzer should be allowed to interview CC candidates? Yes, but only from a neutral standpoint. I believe he knows where the line is drawn, but just to be absolutely transparent, he should not use SANDDAO to promote himself, or any particular candidate.

1. it was our hope in writing this that the Delegates and the CC would actively (and transparently) work together in public (on the forums) to shape and advance SIPs

2. whether candidates can vote in the election is GREAT point of discussion – if a whale runs, they’d carry significant VP – To me, this seems like a strong inclusion that I am happy to have seen the community advance. But it’s up for discussion here…

Who else favors candidates NOT being allowed to vote in their own election??

3. I think Lanzer knows the line, too. And probably won’t cross it. But again, it’s community consensus here. What do others think?

NOTE: I read your # 2 above wrong!!
You’re talking about voting on SIPs, but I was referring to voting on their own elections ---- BOTH are great points and up for discussion — That said, it is my instinct to say that CC should, in fact, be allowed to vote on their own SIPs

[theKuntaMC]

@Lanzer

maybe it’s safer for our DAO if we just set a standard across the board for every position of power within the DAO to not vote on their own things (or maybe just Abstain so we keep making quorum )

this seems like a good idea!!

what are other’s thoughts on this??

[theKuntaMC]

@DAO

I think it should be something that’s agreed upon across the board. As to whether it’s enforceable, I highly doubt so, unless the constitution says an SIP is nullified if the author votes, which it doesn’t.

There’re ways to circumvent it too, delegate to another anon wallet, transferring assets to a different wallet before snapshot is taken etc.

So ultimately, the notion should be that persons of influence should not vote on their own SIP in good faith, nothing more.

not permitting positions of power to vote (anything besides abstain) on their own SIPs would have to be a “good faith” measure, as I see it — unless sum1 knows a technical way to enforce

[theKuntaMC]

@KCL

My concern is that I do not think seeing 15 kUSD going into 15+ interviews of candidate for CC member is a wise use of DAO money if SIP SANDDAO pass.

With regards to fairness as long as you are candidate you should not interview the other candidates as :

• you somehow force them to chose your format and if they do not show it can be badly perceived.
• you chose the questions and you are in control of the discussion

I am from the opinion that everybody should be free to choose their format and if you are doing a promotion podcast for yourself you should not use the SIP SANDAO funding. That is only my opinion and everybody is free to make their own choices.

these are very valid concerns that others here are encouraged to chime in on
— what do others think?

[theKuntaMC]

A summary of the Concerns / Questions I have seen, so far:

1. term limits (1 year or 2?)
2. using SADNDAO podcast for promo
3. can CC vote on their own SIPs?
4. can CC candidates vore for their own election?
5. should CC be allowed to author SIPs at all?
6. should we have a minium vote threshold requirement for CC candidates to get elected even if they’re in the top 5?
7. should we have a standard across all positions of power in which they cannot use their VP in any way besides ABSTAIN to vote on a SIP they advanced?

I will circle back to this thread on Jan 3rd

Love y’all, SandFam
Happy 2025

[theKuntaMC]

Of course, the CC is NOT yet official but this comparison table of the different roles within the DAO should still be useful for us all.

It will be revised to reflect accuracy if this proposed SIP changes anything, such as the term limit.

[Lanzer]

@theKuntaMC

using SADNDAO podcast for promo

Interviewing a CC candidate, same as interviewing a SIP author while their SIP is in vote, isn’t promotional content…it’s just content. That’s the nature of the DAO. My podcast is about the DAO, and I don’t feel good about ignoring elections when it’s a DAO-specific thing.

@theKuntaMC

should we have a standard across all positions of power in which they cannot use their VP in any way besides ABSTAIN to vote on a SIP they advanced?

It’s probably a good place to start. I feel uneasy about it because it feels excessive for an unpaid position. If I get elected and figure out that actually, CC has a ton of power, then I’m gonna want to set that standard.

[KCL]

Thinking again about that 2 years and the points brought by @DAO it might be a good idea to have an overlapping of the 2 elections. This will bring some continuity to the collaboration. One year you change the SC and keep the CC that can ease the new SC onboarding and the other year vice-versa.

[KCL]

Threshold should be added but it is not a good idea to put a simple percentage. Reason is that 10 % of current quorum is 3 M. Should be achievable for 5 candidate if delegates holding 80% of quorum VP and spreading accross their 5 best candidates instead of only one. But in case a whale is running and voting or if the engagement of the community is very high you have more risk that some people might not reach the 10% of voting (eg/ if 50M VP is used you need to reach 5 M). Therefore it might be smarter to put the threshold at fixed number of VP.
Threshold of 3 M VP seems a good number (it means you were able to convince 1.5 delegates)

[KandidlyKristen]

My absolute biggest issue with this? This is just another position that the members are forced to “Commit to serving The Sandbox DAO” as is outlined countless times throughout this proposal. The community’s representatives on the “Community Council” in the DAO should not be forced to serve the DAO, they should be forced to serve The Community.

Setting that aside, basically the Special Council members that are each paid 220,000 SAND for their first term are so disconnected from the community that they need to find 5 community members who will be forced to have “daily,” “per week,” “bi-weekly” and “monthly” requirements (according to the responsibilities in the SIP) for free so that they can share their opinion in order to follow through with what the Special Council has already promised to do for over 7 months, which is:

Special Council members provide guidance on Sandbox Improvement Proposals (SIPs), ensuring that they align with The Sandbox DAO’s vision and the community’s interests. They also hold decision-making power and can veto proposals based on legality, redundancy, conflict, and community interests.

Do I think the community deserves to have a voice in the DAO? Absolutely. Do I think we need to find 5 members who can dedicate multiple hours every single week for free so that the Special Council can follow through on their promise of being there for the community’s interests? No.

Current amount the Special Council members will each make for 0 required hours of work in their entire first term: $127,952 USD each

If the Community’s Interests were so important, why wasn’t this created in the first place?

If the Community’s Interests were so important, why wasn’t a single member of the community put on the Special Council?

If the Community’s Interests were so important, why wasn’t a single community member even put on the Advisory Board?

The only thing I see coming from this in the end is the Community Council does all the work for free to ensure that the Special Council retains for their decently paid jobs in the next election, which they have 0 work requirements for.

If this reaches quorum, I will be voting No. I do not support forcing hours of free work every day, week and month onto the lowest community members while all the money goes to the top management who has zero requirements and just collects a paycheck.

They knew what they were doing when they created this DAO. They got themselves the money and the power they wanted for themselves and their friends. Time for them to do what they promised, resign or get voted out. This is not the time for them to force the work on others while they do nothing but earn their paychecks.

[Lanzer]

Constitution mentions 110K/yr each for Sandbox DAO SC. $220K is ApeCoin DAO SC.

Yes, we’re being asked to contribute our expertise and time for free. Yes, one could argue the SC and AB should be doing these things.

However, being in the CC is an opportunity for us to actually get in there and contribute more meaningfully. And right now, it’s a pretty good compromise and represents an opportunity to work with the DAO Admin toward progressive decentralization…look at me, I’m even starting TO SOUND LIKE THEM gosh darnet

[KandidlyKristen]

Correct. I questioned this multiple times myself. Geraldine clarified that it was per year per member, so 220,000 SAND each for their first term since their first term was over 2 years.

But I still don’t understand the need for it at all. Is it because the DAO Admin team and Special Council has no interest in what the community has to say so they need to force 5 community members to put in daily, weekly, bi-weekly and monthly work for free to let them know what the community members have to say?

To me all this seems like is a way for the Special Council to be able to say “see, we listened to the community” in order to ensure they receive their paychecks for another year to do absolutely nothing. So, for that reason, and because this “Community Council” is being proposed to “serve The Sandbox DAO” and NOT to “serve the Community,” I will either not vote, or if it reaches quorum, I will vote 100% No.

[Lanzer]

so 220,000 SAND each for their first term since their first term was over 2 years.

Ah…I see now. Gotcha, thanks.

Is it because the DAO Admin team and Special Council has no interest in what the community has to say

Well, I’m partly to blame. I posted a couple of Working Groups (GWG & BCWG) back in August and DAO Admin team turned it into the Community Council SIP.

I didn’t think to question the free part…I think I was just happy to see a council position be established. I believe the DAO Admin Team’s train of thought was to ensure that CC was doing it for the right reasons. Similar to the delegates being unpaid. With the money comes risk of corruption, but I can see how one would think that’s a convenient excuse to avoid paying the community for its efforts.

Do you think the CC should be paid? How much do you think is reasonable? I already announced my self-nomination for CC so I don’t want to be seen as self-serving or doing something improper here.

As coauthor I can talk to Kunta about adding it before it goes to Snapshot.

It’s still in discussion…so we can change it up.

[KandidlyKristen]

To me the idea of being unpaid with forced hours of work to make sure those receiving as much money as the Special Council is making is just crazy, especially given the amount they make for having zero requirements. Two of them could literally do nothing and walk away with 220,000 SAND after their first term. Given we are on SIP 18, the only requirement they had was for 3 of them to vote 18 times as to if they approve, reject, are neutral or veto it. That is my biggest issue with the pay, not the number, the amount of work. To me the idea of crypto isn’t for the low level workers to do all the work just to ensure the rich get richer, it’s to level the playing field. So I don’t really have a number since to me it doesn’t address the real issue with the DAO. Nor does it give the community actual representation.

But my biggest issue that this is just another council put in place to serve the DAO, not the community, as it states in the SIP. All they had to do was allow a discussion on the creation of the first SIPs and put just one person from the community in a position of power. As I even explained up the chain on my end, they could have easily made it someone like Panda or Alex who was also an employee of TSB and therefore had the conflict of voting against their boss, Seb, but to the community it would have still maintained the face of a community member being in a place of power to speak on behalf of the community.

Given the work requirements in comparison to the Special Council, the only way I would vote for this is if it had a fair compensation rate compared to their requirements, and I don’t think the rest of the community would be willing to spend that much more SAND just on a few people when the money needs to be going to the project itself.

That and taking out every single line about the community council being there specifically to serve the DAO. The Community Council should be there serve the Community. The DAO has already managed to make every single other person in TSB, including the Ambassadors, nothing more than a worker there to serve the DAO. The Community has even less representation that it did before the DAO now that everyone is forced to serve the almighty DAO. The only thing that I would vote for is a Council that has absolutely no requirements to serve the DAO and can openly disagree with the DAO if they feel it is in the best interest of the Community, especially given they have absolutely Zero power as their purpose is only to Advise the Special Council (which, I mistakenly thought, was the purpose of the Advisory Board given the name).

Honestly, your intentions may have been in the right place and I appreciate that, but this execution feels like nothing more than a slap in the face for the community.

I keep being told to not give up and come back and see everything that is going on, but everything that is going on is just taking more and more away from the community to make them workers of the DAO there to serve the DAO and not the community. The community that built up this project needs and deserves actual representation and power. Even if it is a vast minority power at this stage.

[theKuntaMC]

@KandidlyKristen

Given the work requirements in comparison to the Special Council, the only way I would vote for this is if it had a fair compensation rate compared to their requirements, and I don’t think the rest of the community would be willing to spend that much more SAND just on a few people when the money needs to be going to the project itself.

I would love to hear what the rest of the community thinks about this.

Thanks for bringing this up!!

Should these roles be compensated?

Or should be it passion and commitment to the ecosystem alone that motivates candidates??

@KandidlyKristen

The community that built up this project needs and deserves actual representation and power. Even if it is a vast minority power at this stage.

That’s exactly what this is offering.

I hope you run for one of the 5 positions, Kristen, so you can see firsthand how badly we want to empower people with your level of passion.

@KandidlyKristen

But my biggest issue is that this is just another council put in place to serve the DAO, not the community, as stated in the SIP. All they had to do was allow a discussion on the creation of the first SIPs and put just one person from the community in a position of power.

The DAO is the Community. The Admin Team is one of several bodies of authority within the DAO who all ultimately work for the community (ie, the DAO).

This SIP puts 5 people into positions of authority instead of 1.

It’s very clear you’re still upset about the first few SIPs. Many are. Justifiably, too.

This is a response to those concerns.

@KandidlyKristen

The only thing that I would vote for is a Council that has absolutely no requirements to serve the DAO and can openly disagree with the DAO if they feel it is in the best interest of the Community

The CC (as described here) can certainly disagree with the admin team. In fact, that’s the whole point. That’s the power this gives the SandFam: a direct voice to the DAO admin team through officially elected representatives.

I believe wholeheartedly when you relinquish some of your animosity toward the Admin Team stemming from some poor decisions early on and begin fueling your collaborative spirit that you’ll see more clearly the true spirit of this SIP.

Anyone who works for the DAO works for the community, and vice versa. The DAO is the community. They are the same thing. Seeing them as oppositional bodies may be the reason we’re not seeing eye to eye.

[KCL]

@theKuntaMC

@KandidlyKristen

Given the work requirements in comparison to the Special Council, the only way I would vote for this is if it had a fair compensation rate compared to their requirements, and I don’t think the rest of the community would be willing to spend that much more SAND just on a few people when the money needs to be going to the project itself.

I would love to hear what the rest of the community thinks about this.

Thanks for bringing this up!!

Should these roles be compensated?

Or should be it passion and commitment to the ecosystem alone that motivates candidates??

My opinion on that, and is linked to my very first question on this thread (why CC instead of a seat at SC?), I would rather have a 6th SC members and being of the community paid with the same check as SC members than having 5 others of the CC being paid. And if 6 SC members is not possible why not asking if one of SC members does not want to resign provoking new member election?

[Lanzer]

@KandidlyKristen

That and taking out every single line about the community council being there specifically to serve the DAO.

I think this can be arranged. Some of the wording did occur to me as being too “serve the SC or DAO Admin Team” centric, but I didn’t touch it much because the actual implementation of this will be much closer to what you described. Mostly because

• The CC isn’t getting paid
• The CC are working-level community members
• They’d be going into this role with a full understanding of how everyone feels right now
• I don’t see the TSB Game Company & TSB Foundation doing much about a tough CC. You’re my prime example. You’re still an Ambassador, right? And you’ve said some really, REALLY harsh things about TSB, the DAO, and specific people.

At least, I’ll speak for myself on that. That’s what I’d be walking into the job thinking.

I’ll take a look at the CC serving the TSB DAO Foundation.

[KandidlyKristen]

I understand that this is an attempt at a response to the concerns, but this isn’t a good attempt.

CC: Daily, Weekly, Bi-Weekly, Monthly requirements of all 5 of 5 on the Council for 0 compensation for the sole purpose of letting the SC and DAO Admin team know what the Community’s Interests are. No voting power. No public power other than gathering data and sharing it with those who are earning. Lots of discussion and voting about these people.

SC: 0 Requirements except 3 of 5 must vote on the SIPs after all of the work is done by others for 220,000 SAND Each. No discussion or voting about these people.

Why do none of them have any passion for learning what the Community’s Interests are? Why do we need to force hours of free labor out of those with passion to enable the top earners to do what they promised?

And yes, my problems will always be with the first impression of this DAO. Anyone running a $1.55 Billion Market Cap Corporation should know that first impressions are important. I do not believe for a second that after securing themselves and their friends the money and power they did from the DAO that they suddenly had a coming to light that maybe they should start to care about the community. Which is why I don’t trust that this is anything more than an attempt to help them secure the power and money in the next election by claiming this is them caring about the Community. If they cared, they would have the passion to know what the Community’s Interests are without forcing free labor out of others so they can be told what the Community’s Interests are.

I also don’t believe that they didn’t know what the Community’s Interests were in the beginning given the direct line of communication with Seb where he stated that “This is not for me to reconsider, but for the community to vote upon” when all we asked for was the chance to have a discussion on the first SIPs before voting on them.

As for the DAO Admin team, when addressed with the fact that those who staked their SAND to support the project were not only not given any VP at all but also were not even given the chance to unstake their SAND to get their VP before the vote, the DAO Admin team addressed it by saying “We’ve been monitoring the discussion about staking because there are some people that want staking involved and some that don’t.” Not a single member of the community addressed that concern, the vast vast majority did have a problem with there being no VP for stakers. In fact, the only concern that was addressed was if they should have more VP than the day traders who didn’t stake to support the project. Some didn’t want staking to happen at all. Some didn’t want them to have extra VP. But no one said those who stake should have Zero VP like the DAO Admin team claimed.

So we’ve already seen what advising these people about the Community’s Interests has lead to.

And the fact is that the Community Council has no voting power, no recommendation power, no veto power and the only “power” they have is to tell the Special Council and DAO admin team what the community wants when we have already seen direct communication with both and been completely shot down by both. So, no, I do not see how the Community Council has any power at all, nor do I see how anything would change at all.

So no, I see no purpose for this. Yes, I fully understand that those running for re-election are almost always voted back in. But I still feel like the only real way to address these issues is to wait for the next election and vote these people out, every single one of them. If they want a faster solution then I would be happy to see them return the money they stole from The Sandbox by claiming they were doing this to “work for the community” when they don’t have the passion to even figure out what the community’s interests are (even when blatantly being told) without forcing free labor out of others. DAOs are supposed to be the community. This DAO, however, is not the community and has actively worked against the community from the beginning. The Special Council and DAO Admin team have already made it clear that this isn’t a Community DAO when they told us that slowly in the future they will work to decentralize and hand over power to the community over the years. And this SIP does nothing to give the Community any of that power.

And no, I am not saying this because I want to be paid. In fact, I never even suggested myself for the Special Council when the team asked me who from the community should be on it, I always suggested the livestreamers because The Sandbox was never about a job for me. I have a career I’m happy in already. And for the Community Council, as an Ambassador for The Sandbox, I don’t think I would be able to apply based on this:

@theKuntaMC

Ambassadors and Delegates cannot be CC members for the same reason staff of TSB or the DAO Admin team cannot: to keep our formal roles in the DAO restricted a single title. This avoids conflicts of interest and safeguards against too much influence from any single individual.

Though I am not an Ambassador of The Sandbox DAO which is what almost all of the new ambassadors were turned into while most of the old ambassadors for The Sandbox quit when we found out we would be turned into employees serving the DAO. But I didn’t quit and my title has not been taken away from me (probably because taking it away would mean that The Sandbox and The Sandbox DAO are not two separate entities as is claimed since I only speak against the DAO and never The Sandbox).

And let’s not forget what the SIP actually says about if the Community Council serves the Community or the DAO:

@theKuntaMC

In all interactions, each member of The Sandbox DAO Community Council shall:

• Commit to serving The Sandbox DAO with integrity, impartiality, and dedication to the DAO’s guiding values and goals.
• Adhere to the highest ethical standards, avoiding any actions or decisions that could harm the reputation or functioning of the DAO.

The Community Council will serve the DAO, not the Community. The DAO has enough servants between the Special Council, Advisory Board, Admin Team and now Ambassadors that claim to be there for the community but obviously aren’t if they need 5 people to perform daily, weekly, bi-weekly and monthly requirements to be that voice for the community.

Since we weren’t allowed a simple discussion or a single representative of the Community on the Special Council, here’s how to get my vote and support:

• Change the SIP to include amending the first SIPs removing all compensation for the Special Council and forcing them to return any compensation they already received. Put that 1.1 Million SAND towards Community Interests. Let them show they are about the passion. Or Pay the Community Council the exact same amount as the Special Council and take even more money from the Community.
• Remove every single line mentioning that the Community Council is there to serve the DAO. Replace it with serving the Community.
• Give the Community Council the same power as the Special Council with respect to voting on SIPs or vetoing them. And publish that recommendation to the SIP so the Special Council, Advisory Board, DAO Admin Team and, especially, the Community can see how the Community feels.
• Give the Community Council the same requirements as the Special Council with respect to absolutely no requirements other than 3 of 5 needing to vote on SIPs.

[rocksymiguel]

While this idea makes me think that the DAO Admin Team is finally accepting one of the problems that currently exist:

@Lanzer

Cyril’s DAO team is administrative in nature. The Special Council have many other responsibilities in their own lives–leaders like Yat Siu can’t be expected to participate to the extent we’d want when leading a global company of 300+ companies, and the Advisory Board are more consultant in nature. There’s no “governing body” that focuses on the daily workings of the DAO.

Also this has been pointed out by the community since the origin of the DAO, the lack of community representation in decision making or in council. Although this SIP co-authored by the DAO Admin Team (and Lanzer) is pointing that problem and trying to solve it, I don’t think this is the way to do it.
I think it’s like ‘putting a patch on it’ or ‘sweeping something under the carpet and move on’, but it’s not a real or effective solution.

There is another even bigger problem, the lack of participation of community members. I find it very difficult to see that a Community Council is going to solve that, let alone that someone is going to want to do it for free for two years. But I think that’s was something that was in mind while making this SIP:

@theKuntaMC

Process for Removal

CC members intending to voluntarily step down from their role for any reason must notify the DAO Admin team with as much notice as possible, ideally one month before they are unable to continue their duties.

I may be wrong or not see the bigger picture but I don’t think a community council encourages broader engagement and sustainable community involvement.