IIP-59-Final: Data Economy Index (DATA)

[Thomas_Hepner]

Hello @puniaviision - thank you for your thoughtful feedback. I’ll be honest that your comment surprised me given that the Fee Split is based on the official Index Coop DATA Methodologist Fee Split Offer that was prepared with input from a cross-functional group of stakeholders:

@BigSky7

This post lays out the official fee split offer from Index Coop to the DATA Methodologists. The BD WG is tasked with coordinating with external partners. However, the cross-functional nature of this discussion requires inputs from several key stakeholders across the DAO, including Product, Growth, and Treasury. To reach this final offer, we have engaged with leaders from these working groups who offer specific context.

Regardless, Titans of Data would rather hear your open and honest feedback even after an official offer has been agreed upon so that any outstanding issues or concerns can be addressed ahead of a (hopefully successful) DG2 vote.

Here are our comments and questions in response to your legitimate concerns.

@puniaviision

I think this clause is pretty extreme. It differs significantly from what is offered to any other methodologist

To be clear, it is not Titans of Data’s preference to have a stop-gap agreement like the one we have mutually agreed to with the Index Coop. We would have strongly preferred to go into the DG2 vote with a long-term methodologist fee split/reward program in place that all stakeholders could be excited about. Our intention to have a fair and equitable long-term agreement that could be used as a template for future products and methodologists is the reason we brought forward multiple proposals including the Methodologist Accelerator Program which we spent considerable time and effort researching and designing.

Ultimately, the DATA Methodologist Fee Split Offer was mutually agreed upon so that progress can be made on the product while a future template for simple index offers is being designed.

@puniaviision

it’s unclear the [potentially immense] technical requirement to even execute this.

My understanding is that the primary technical requirement of off-boarding would be to transfer the Manager Address from the Set Labs Multisig to a Titans of Data multisig. I have done this before with a TokenSet that I created and it was ~10 minute process. Are there additional requirements or complexity that Titans of Data is not aware of or considering that would be a considerable burden for Set Labs or Index Coop? Adding @dylan for additional context and clarification from an engineering perspective so we can adjust the final IIP if necessary.

@puniaviision

I would feel much better about this proposal if this clause was removed and our normal offboarding process [CGI] was the norm.

Titans of Data does not think the IIP to deprecate CGI due to lack of product-market-fit should be considered a “normal” process for product off-boarding. We also do not think the off-boarding clause for DATA should become a precedent for future product off-boarding though we acknowledge that could be an unintended consequence.

If I correctly understand your concern, potentially shared by INDEX tokenholders, it would be that Titans of Data could off-board DATA if it becomes a successful product without the Index Coop’s consent. On the other hand, our primary concern is that without the off-boarding clause we have no recourse if the Index Coop decides not to overhaul the current flawed methodologist system; we could be permanently stuck with the existing methodologist fee structure. Titans of Data and Index Coop is in a Catch-22 under the existing methodologist structure.

In conclusion, we completely empathize with your and other INDEX tokenholders concern about the off-boarding clause but do not know how we could revise the IIP to eliminate the Catch-22 and build mutual trust.

We’re open to any suggestions that build mutual trust and give tokenholders the confidence they need to vote FOR the final DATA IIP.