Understanding that “the seven members of the council can come from any of the five nests”, given the remit noted above, it would be wise for the Council to have leaders and even over-representation from the key areas of the org, create / grow / maintain, functions.
For example:
Other good fits for Council V2 are (in no particular order)
@nic. We appreciate you no doubt have your own preferences but respectfully we all do and the community are capable of making their own decisions which is what the ballot box is for. In the UK it is customary to end campaigning, electioneering and related activities once voting is underway so as to respect the choice of voters and avoid any perceptions of undue influence over a democratic process. I kindly ask we all now do the same and accept the outcome of the vote whatever it may be. Thanks
This is a good call-out @lee0007 and one that I’d spent a good bit of time considering myself; I agree that the poll isn’t as useful as it could be in terms of informing a second term for the ex v1 council members. It was the remaining ex-council that outlined the terms and there was communication with @Metfanmike about the particular day of the term-end for ex-v1 prior to election-start. At the time of consideration (when the ex-council were seeking term-extension rather than re-election) the accepted logic was that 6-months inclusive of time-served would make a complete term for the members that served on the experimental v1 council. Given that we’re underway with clearly stated terms and there were no objections from affected parties prior I’d prefer to hold any term adjustments until subsequent to the election. I’ll hold any thoughts around term length and cadence until after the current election but will be happy to discuss after to give better legitimacy tp a v3 council; please keep in mind that the v1 retrospective being coordinated by @shawn16400 may help inform a better solution here as well.
gm @StepvhenH
I can confirm that the voting website is operating properly and you should rank 7 out of the total field; ideally the 7 you prefer to see serve on the council.
Hi @mel.eth,
To confirm my understanding here, the 6 month initial term date was used, but council members don’t receive Council level renumeration whilst between councils ie: 28/02 to 31/04.
Renumeration is linked to if the council is active or not and the duration of time served is 6 months form when appointed.
It is a bit messy and the first iterations of the council are also faced with the most challenges. I think going into V3, there needs to be a lot smoother transition. In some ways we lost a month of time here, we need to capitalise on the opportunities to improve here.
Just want to clarify this as contributor rewards are going out soon.
As voting continues I would like to encourage us to take cognizance of the fact that ICC V1, was great and they set a good foot forward. And we must now envision a better council that will, and must consider a truly diversified “Transparent” decentralization that must at this level of Decentralization, reflect on our ICC V2 council members.
One Important thing to consider, the amount of nominated women/Non-binary contributors and the percentage voted in!
The initial council term was ~3-months concluding on 28Feb2022 with no consideration of ongoing terms for those council members. For clarity the v2 council term will begin 01April2022 and members will be remunerated at the Band 6 rate for the time elected and served.
Council remuneration is linked to elected service (not appointment, to clarify), not a prescribed timeframe. Should a councilmember step back from elected service (as I did) or a term ends (as yours did) remuneration should return to the level of service that contributor provides otherwise. I think we’re saying the same thing I’m just clarifying that term lengths have changed from v1 (3 months) to v2 (6 months).
We are saying the exact same thing on the renumeration front which is good.
For awareness; thank you to all voters and candidates!
https://app.choicevoting.co.uk/election/ended/WGYWKgGYvj
Elected Owls for Index Council v2:
@anthonyb.eth
@catjam
@afromac
@Metfanmike
@Matthew_Graham
@edwardk
@0x_Dev
Great selection! Huge congrats to all, commiserations to those that dmi!
V. excited to see the results of this team in action.
Congrats Council v2. Excellent team!
Congratulations to all owls elected to the Index Council. Stoked to see what we can achieve throughout this council’s term 
Congratulations to the new elected council members.
great team! Huge congrats to all the owls selected. This next six months will be truly awesome!
Congratulations to the newly elected coop council. All the best to you all in taking IC to newer heights.
Following up with a Conflict of Interest statement, which I didn’t specify in my original post!
I have a full time job at Flipside Crypto, where I lead product + ops for our DAO initiatives. I currently work in MetricsDAO as part of that remit. MetricsDAO is pre-token, and I do not receive contributor rewards there. I do not have any significant token holdings (defined as >5% of my net worth) to disclose.
As a formality just posting here that a member (Matt G) of the council has stepped down.
Full details here
Also seeking to kick off the official conversation around re-electing a new member. Some questions to get the juices flowing:
cc @0x_Dev @catjam @anthonyb.eth @afromac @Metfanmike @edwardk
and @mel.eth
Thanks
Hey @MrMadila,
The council is discussing next steps for a special election with @GovNest (@mel.eth) and we are discussing the details today.
Thanks,
Anthony
Hi @anthonyb.eth,
Can the council please advise if members of the MGC are eligible to vote? I believe these contributors, who receive monthly payments from Index Coop were ineligible to vote last time. Hopefully we can address this issue as the contributors in questions are stated as being apart of the Metagovernance Pod during the Season 1 budget proposal from Governance Nest.
Is it fair to assume, that the call for nomination to go out early next week is reasonable. A snap election should be just that, snappy, and not overly bureaucratic.
It certainly has been a busy time for the council this last couple weeks. Thank you in advance and keep up the great work.
I’ll defer to @anthonyb.eth but for clarity around the process as it stands and progress toward same wrt filling the vacant Index Council seat absent direction:
The Index Council Snap Election nominations will start on Monday 18 April 2022 and run through Friday 22 April 2022 to fill one seat. The election will be via choice vote (same process as last time) and start on 25 April 2022 running for 72 hours. Voter rolls will be determined using the S1 nest proposals and any subsequent updates through EOD 15 April 2022. If there are additions or exceptions to the voter roll determined by council, please communicate them here and we’ll pick them up in the nomination post along with reference to the relevant lists/levels otherwise.
GovNest will be posting a separate call for recommendations, suggestions, and dare I say complaints that will inform process improvement for the next round (which will be determined via open meetings coordinated by GovNest), currently planned ahead of @Metfanmike’s seat vacating on 31 May 2022 ( nominations starting 02 May 2022 and election on 09 May 2022 to give a two-week transition period).
Philosophically, a vacant seat when 7 are prescribed represents unplanned centralization. A council may override, but we are in strong agreement @Matthew_Graham that vacant seats should be filled quickly.
I’ll note that payment of the MGC seems to run through GovNest for accounting purposes, but not in practicality as a standard IIP created the MGC, not the nesting process. The ICCv1 did not clearly identify the MGC as DAO contributors, and I would caution against doing so; they need to remain independent deciders imo. The stance of this DAO and Gov Nest absent financial considerations has been that the MGC is an independent body, elected to decide when INDEX voters don’t reach quorum, not DAO contributors. That said, they can be both if they contribute outside of the MGC chat as do @Lavi and @ncitron. @Lavi is compensated separately for operational duties inside the MGC as execution is not part of the IIP mandate and needs to occur regardless of whether MGC of INDEX voters decide. I’ll defer to council action here if there is any to be had, but my recommendation is that MGC contribution remain under the IIP framework for both payment and modification to remain credibly neutral.