IIP Number: 85
Title: Temporary Funding Council Decision Making
Status: Proposed
Author(s): @anon10525910, @DarkForestCapital, @pepperoni_joe
Discussions-to: [n/a for now]
Created: 9/14/21
Simple Summary
This is a proposal to temporarily grant the Funding Council clear decision making responsibility on Q4 Working Group proposals. Importantly, it also puts forward a framework by which those decisions will be made.
The desired outcome is a community-validated process for approving Working Group proposals for Q4-2021.
This delegation of responsibility will expire at the end of Q4-21 (December 31, 2021) or upon the creation of a replacement decision making responsibility via the Index 2.0 process, whichever comes first.
Abstract
If this proposal is implemented: The Funding Council will have more clear responsibility to follow a decision making process when reviewing and approving Working Groups for Q4. The proposed process is detailed below.
Expiration: This delegation of decision making responsibility will expire at the end of Q4-21 (December 31, 2021) or upon the creation of a replacement decision making responsibility via the Index 2.0 process, whichever comes first.
No other changes are being proposed: The Funding Council will continue to review proposals, insist on consistency across proposals, ask sharp questions in the forums on behalf of the Coop, process & distribute payments on a monthly basis, and will have to request a Grant #5 in order to process Working Group Contributor Payments, among its other responsibilities.
Motivation
Working Groups Context [Background]
The Funding Council (formerly Treasury Committee) exists via quarterly IIPs. See: Grant #4, Grant #3, Grant #2, Genesis Grant.
The Working Group structure is a Funding Council construct put into existence on March 9, 2021 via Laying the rails for Working Groups (WG) v1 . It was slightly modified via Working Groups v1.1. Those posts communicate the process by which Working Groups are created (“how are they created”).
Index 2.0 [Context]
The Coop is currently in the midst of change via the Index 2.0 process.
Based on sentiment expressed in the “Future of Finance” workshop and elsewhere, it seems clear that the nature of the Funding Council will change in the next couple of months. The exact changes are not yet known and will not be implemented in time to ensure that Working Group Leaders have clarity needed to plan & operate in Q4-2021.
As such, we are seeking an interim solution that ensures operations continue while also respecting and supporting the Index 2.0 process.
Problem Statement(s)
Given the-above context, the current state of approving Working Groups is inadequate because:
- Index 2.0 conversations have made clear that the status quo is unsatisfactory. As such, the Funding Council wants to more clearly act on behalf of the community.
- There is no clear framework for how the Funding Council decides to approve a Working Group.
- The Index Coop lacks a clear process by which Working Groups are approved for Q4-2021.
Specification
Overview
This IIP will solve those problems by
- Providing a clear decision making process
- Seeking community buy-in on this interim solution
- Until expiration, more clearly granting Funding Council members the responsibility to enact that decision making process on behalf of the Coop
Proposed Decision Making Process
A final poll posted in the forums will ultimately be used to determine approval.
Here is the proposed process
Proposals and feedback
[No change] Working Group Proposals are posted to the forums. Steps 1-3 (post, FC assesses, any updates made) ensues, as specified in Working Groups v1.1.
“Final Vote” Poll
Once the Working Group Proposer is ready, they will update the forum post with a “Final Vote” poll.
This poll must be created according the following guidelines
- Single Choice: FOR / AGAINST
- Anonymous voting (that is, do not check “show who voted”)
- Automatically close poll: 3 days after posting.
- Show Results: Only after voting
- Limit voting to:
Trust Level 1
Announcements
- The Final Vote must be announced by the author as a reply to the original post
- This announcement should make clear this is the “Final Vote.”
Odds/ends
- Only one “Final Vote” poll may be posted
- Working Group proposers are certainly welcome to use “temperature check” polls prior to this step.
Passing Thresholds
- 20 or more voters must participate
- 80% or more must vote FOR
If passing thresholds are not met
- The Funding Council will not include the proposed Working Group’s requested budget as part of the Grant #5 requests.
- If the Working Group still wishes to seek funding they can nonetheless propose themselves via IIP to receive funding directly from the Community Treasury.
This process will be utilized by the Funding Council for all Working Group proposals until expiration at the end of Q4-21 (December 31, 2021) or upon the creation of a replacement decision making responsibility via the Index 2.0 process, whichever comes first.
Rationale
There are a number of considerations and alternatives.
Considerations
- Need for a stopgap - Index 2.0 and the “Future of Finance” is advancing. It is known things will change, but it is not known when or how. Until then, the Coop must continue operating.
- Need for community buy-in - At this stage, the FC is not comfortable making decisions on working group proposals without more clear community buy-in.
- Time is of the essence - Working Groups need clarity now in order to prepare for Q4. Not providing clarity could lead to a Coop-Wide operations slowdown.
A few, alternatives were considered:
-
Maintain status quo: This was discarded due to the feeling on the FC of lack of clear responsibility to say “yes” or “no,” as well the sentiment expressed by the broader community around the FC. We want deeper community buy-in. -
Run all WG proposals as IIPs: This could also work, though the concerns such as of voter fatigue (we expect ~10 Working Group proposals) & outsiders influencing the outcomes lead us to believe it is not the ideal solution right now.
Risks
Forum Poll
A forum poll is not a perfect voting solution. For one thing, it is open to sybil attack.
Mitigant: Working Group proposers must limit voting to “Trust Level 1” to mitigate this risk.
All-or-nothing Grant IIP
One risk that has always existed, and will continue, is that Working Groups’ budgets rely on an “all or nothing” IIP to grant INDEX to the Funding Council (i.e. Funding Council Grant #4). It is only possible to propose that grant after clarity is gained on the number of working groups & their budget requirements.
Mitigants:
- Contributor voting on each Working Group proposal should mean that any WG that gets approved has sufficient community buy-in. Ostensibly, this will lead to a successful Grant #5.
- If the future Grant #5 IIP vote fails, there are two fallbacks
- Operations should be able to continue for some period of time using funds that may remain in the FC wallet from Grant #4
- Working Groups can propose themselves via IIP to receive funding directly from the Community Treasury. This introduces other risks & challenges, but should ensure some continuity of operations.
Copyright
Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.
I look forward to constructive questions & feedback!
The motivation here is to figure out a solution that best serves the DAO.
lemme know!