Proposal: Governance Operations Working Group

[anon10525910]

Brief table setting

• I’m putting on my “Funding Council” hat to pose questions (See Q4 Working Group Guidance to learn more about Working Group proposals)
• My intent is to ask the questions that ping in my mind with the hope that they help the entire Coop better understand the proposal and thinking behind it.
• Questions are pretty much posed in the order the topic appears in the post.
• If a question doesn’t make sense or is entirely off-base, do call it out

---

@sixtykeys

This provides the Coop with Meta Governance power in protocols such as Aave, Compound and Yearn. Therefore, we need to ensure that this process is running smoothly and efficiently by enabling contributors to manage it and make improvements where needed.

Specific to metagovernance, what would the Gov Ops WG be responsible for? [this question is somewhat tied to my final question down below]

@sixtykeys

autonomy group election

Okay, so hypothetically if someone wanted to run an “Autonomy Kickoff” or “Adding to FC Member”-like election process Gov Ops WG would help facilitate that.

Am i getting that right?

@sixtykeys

we expect the number of proposals to grow exponentially.

This question is not so much related to this proposal, nor am I expecting anyone to have a hardened answer – rather, it seems fruitful for consideration.

Aside from having a dedicated group of folks ensuring operations are handled well, I wonder…

→ In a world of exponentially more proposals, how else might we (as a community) might need to change or adjust how we think about governance?

We have sorta circled around this question a little bit as a community: Yearn Governance 2.0 Discussion, Index Gov 2.0 - Introduction to Delegated Governance

@sixtykeys

Given that passed IIPs generally require that defined action occur, tracking of implementation is currently happening in an ad-hoc manner and generally removed from community awareness.

How are ya’ll thinking a Gov Ops WG will address this point?

@sixtykeys

There is currently a lack of knowledge around Index Improvement Proposals, with many community members not aware of how to go about the process

Just sharing the current resources in case folks are curious:

• https://docs.indexcoop.com/community/governance/index-improvement-proposals-iips/iip-step-by-step
• IIP-26: Index Improvement Proposals V2

@sixtykeys

Provide robust tracking and reporting on governance.

What do you imagine doing beyond the current tracking/reporting?

Which, from my limited vantage point, includes tracking then reporting on Monday & Wednesday calls.

@sixtykeys

Provide risk, failure, and near-miss assessments requested by the community.

What does this mean?

@sixtykeys

We have budgeted for $10,000 per month (This is under the expectation of 2 or 3 additional contributors to this working group during Q4).

What sort of responsibilities do you expect additional contributors to take on?

@sixtykeys

The Meta-Governance Committee is funded via IIP-51 at $7,500/mo in total. No proposed change to amount or process; however, this WG will provide operational support upon request.

Noting my current understanding of the MGC situation in case it is wrong:

• IIP-51 expires on October 8th (3 months after the Snapshot vote, per the IIP)
• The $7,500 per month of stipends for the MGC members will also end
• Unless there is a replacement IIP

Second

• to confirm, we (the Coop) should consider a potential Gov Ops WG & any future MGC as separate enmities with separate mandates. Correct?
• What sort of operational support might this WG provide a future MGC?