Index 2.0 | Leadership, Governance and Decision Making (Pods, Nest and Index Council)

I’m strongly FOR this initiative.

There are so many areas of the coops activities that either fall between the cracks, or are too broad for one person / WG to feel empowered to push forward.

This either results in nothing getting done, things caught up in endless discussions / review, things being proposed by a single then hitting resistance (and then nothing happening).

So, some focus and accountability to unblock the coop is to be welcomed :clap:

On IIP’s, I’m not sure I want to give the wise owls a veto on proposed / or passed IIP’s.

However, we have seen IIP’s that could have been better prepared/discussed before voting (and I’ve been guilty of this on occasion). I think one solution could be:

  • Wise owls should discuss and publically comment on any IIP proposals before they goto vote. If they say “We support this proposal, or we think this is bad because of x, y and z” and INDEX holders vote differently then we need to have some serious strategic discussions. [Obviously the wise owls can say, “We think this is a key decision and defer to the INDEX vote”]
  • We need a process to recall / replace IIP’s that have not been implemented. I think giving the wise owls the responsibility to say “On review, implementing IIP-XXX would no benefit INDEX coop for reasons x,y, and z.”. Then we should have a snapshot to confirm the recall.


Call me a clairvoyant but I forecasted the Council of Wise Owls!


This is the next step in how we create a 100 years reputation organisation. Super level up for the Index Coop!!

Also I just want to add on my thoughts for Wise Owls. On top of the roles and responsibility, one main key we need to mindful when nominating and voting is also the character values and virtues it holds. In the end Wise Owls is for and by the people, thus being an exemplary in breathing & living by Guiding Principle and Code of Code of Index Coop. Also for me it really boils down to servitude and servant leadership, thus I would personally look into this when deliberating who to nominate and who to vote on this.

Overall, I’m voting FOR for this and I’m super stocked on what 2022 is install for us as Index Coop. Onwards!!!

p.s. great would seeing the light of this finally, kudos to @Pepperoni_Joe and everyone involved in this.


I have been reading a lot about this and it is safe to say this is so incredible! So much work and careful thoughts being put into this and just like @pujimak_in mentioned, this is how a long-lasting, self-sustaining organization is created. One that will definitely stand the test of time and for others to follow.

I can only vote FOR this, though pretty tough to execute, but the end result is definitely going to be phenomenal and will be recorded in history, thanks to Decentralisation!

Awesome work to the team spearheading this venture, OGs, and of course, wise owls. :owl:

2022 is going to be a parliament of good stuff!


First, thanks to everyone involved, I think this is as transparent as it gets.

Having the wise owls being able to veto proposals concerning themselves might be a bit too recursive. Like @overanalyser highlighted, public commentary on current proposals would be great for all of us trying to stay up to date. I think that they also could facilitate the creation of proposals and help authors take everything relevant into consideration but I’m not in favor of them having veto over IIP’s before or after a vote. I’d prefer giving them agency that is very specific, especially since it is temporary. I imagine that we will evaluate what’s great about it and iterate again, perhaps keeping some or all of it. I’m for the proposal!


Fully agree with this!


Amazing work. I’m still relatively new to IC but joining during this time is so exciting because of the path forward as a leader in Defi and provider of future generational wealth as a generational organization.
I enjoyed the call & discussion last week surrounding the Wise Owls and voting mechanisms. I was not completely ready to support Wise Owls without more definition to the proposal but @Pepperoni_Joe has laid out a set of example boundaries and decision making process. Ultimately, what tipped the scales in favor for me was the clear way decisions presented to, and made by, the Wise Owls will repeatedly be driven back to the Nests/Pods if able.

  • I strongly support the entire framework of Nests, Pods, and temporary Wise Owls.
  • I would like to see a clear imperative for the Wise Owls to publicly post to the community the details of any decision the council needs to make with the amplifying context, decision made, and actions taken to empower a Nest/Pod with that decision going forward if able.
  • I struggled mightily with @mel.eth’s suggestion above. I feel strongly that @mel.eth is right and I agree that IIPs with issues (ie technically infeasible) present a problem that the Wise Owls could/should help shepherd but ultimately I have similar struggles as @overanalyser above with Wise Owls able to overpower the community vote. I would rather see a different mechanism put in place to solve this issue. I voted no for vesting the Wise Owls with veto power.
  • I am in support of researching a voting Token/NFT mechanism that empowers the highest-context contributors. Hope we can work towards that!

I’m also in support of Wise Owls “exercising discretion” (via commentary as @overanalyser suggests, or a veto) over proposed IIPs. I generally feel that a “yes” or “no” token-weighted vote is a poor way to make tough decisions on complex issues, and the more latitude we can provide a trusted, transparent group of people to provide context or veto power, the better we will make decisions.

Have been inspired recently by this beige paper from KeeperDAO on their “governance by apparent consensus” model: – summarizing a few principles below that I believe would also be beneficial for IC:

  1. When consensus is high, the system should move quickly and efficiently
  2. When consensus is low, the system should move slowly to resolve concerns
  3. The interests of individuals with large token holdings should not outweigh the interests of other participants

@Pepperoni_Joe awesome work on this change management undertaking. I was not completely ready to support the formation of wise owls following last weeks meeting (watched recording) however provided additional information on the wise owl responsibilities, ranking order voting and the envisioned decision making flow I am 100% in support

  • Strong support for this new organisational framework w. Nests, Pods, and temporary Wise Owls. I look forward to learning how this will impact the APWG model moving into 2022 ( community call scheduled)
  • I agree with @overanalyser comments and hope to see Wise Owls take a proactive leadership role to publicly post feedback on IIP proposals before they go to vote.
  • I second @StepvhenH comments that wise owls should operate with the “…clear imperative … to publicly post to the community the details of any decision the council needs to make with the amplifying context, decision made, and actions taken to empower a Nest/Pod with that decision going forward if able…”
  • Voted no for vesting the Wise Owls with veto power, only because of the temporary / currently experimental stage of the wise owls. This is something that I’d like to hear more about in future
  • Strong support for the ranking order vote applied here
  • Strong support for researching a voting Token/NFT mechanism that empowers the highest-context contributors.
  • Super keen to see an “Elections & Governance” pod within the Governance nest and if he has the bandwidth would like to see @afromac play a role in this. I would also like to highlight the need to have some female representation in this group too, please.

Just FYI owls, the future is very bright! Gn


I really appreciate this callout. We don’t want the Wise Owl position to accumulate more and more decision-making authority over time (whether accidentally or intentionally). Making it explicit that Wise Owls exist to solve immediate problems and then delegate is key to this being successful imo.


After today’s call and rereading some of the posts here I really like this sentence and feel like the words here distill down what we all were getting at. As much latitude as we can give to a trusted, transparent group


What a gargantuan effort bringing this together. THIS is an example of us living up to our reputation as one of the most considered and progressive DAOs :clap:

Index Coop is at an inflection point, where we could stagnate due to circular bureaucracy, or rally and evolve into a more robust organization. The process we are going through is uncomfortable and intimidating, because we care deeply about building something bigger than ourselves, and want to get it right, but we can’t let fear or perfectionism get in the way of us taking action.

I am FOR this proposal as an assertive step towards an organization that can make decisions, and act with conviction. As I mentioned in It's time to BUIDL 🤝 :

The proposed Nest and Wise Owl framework is a well though out experiment, that can drive us towards action. We have a ripcord if the Wise Owls don’t perform, which means that either lots of decisions get made, or Wise Owls are removed.

I agree with @overanalyser, and am AGAINST IIP veto power. Veto on IIPs is a slippery slope, and I support his description of softer power to transparently influence the voters.


It is awesome to see our community rallying behind this proposal :rocket:

At the Leadership Forum (video) on 17th Nov there was further discussion on the core principles which should underpin the Wise Owls. I have summarized these below:

Wise Owl Principles

  • Wise Owls are responsible for identifying and solving any decisions or challenges that lack a clear owner or route to resolution. They are a backstop on decision making failure and will create clear paths to unblock blockers
  • Wise Owls will use RAPID to create and/or delegate decisions to Nests or Pods to enable progressive decentralization over time.
  • Wise Owls will retain core decision making responsibility in instances where the decisions are so complex, challenging or cross-functional that they cannot be solved by any other group.
  • Wise Owls are committed to transparency and should provide a clear rationale to the community on why decisions are being made
  • Wise Owls are accountable to the Community and Token holders, both of whom have the power to disband the Wise Owls if they are unhappy with the direction. They have executive power, exercised with accountability.
  • Wise Owls are servant leaders and should champion our Guiding Principles. They should foster a sense of belonging and safety and treat all community members with empathy and respect.

Wise Owl Responsibilities

This means that up until the 28th of Feb, Wise Owls responsibilities may include, but are not limited to:

  • Prioritisation of full time hiring
  • Providing Q1 priorities to guide the creation of Nest
  • Determining funding for each Nest
  • Determining the final Compensation & Community Allocation structure to be proposed through IIP
  • Resolving conflict between Nests
  • Meeting bi-weekly with Set Labs

Wise Owl Nominations

We have now established principles for the Wise Owls to operate under and seem to have broad community support to proceed.

As such, it seems the right time to look to start the Wise Owl nomination process :rocket: I will detail the specifics of this process shortly via a separate post.

Wise Owls Name

How cool does Spartan Council, sound!? Names can make a big difference, and lacking any creative inspiration so far I have just stuck with “Wise Owls”. However, to quote some feedback, “Wise Owls - it’s a bit of a s*** name”.

Can you come up with something better?. To help get those creative juices flowing, we are introducing a community competition to rename the Wise Owls… share the winning name and you will get a $1,000 prize.

Please drop your name ideas below. Stick a :heart: if you read a name suggestion that really resonates. If there are a few popular options - we will go to the polls.


Super basic…

A group of owls is call a Parliament… so I’m naturally inclined to suggest.

The Parliament of Owls

or TPOs for short… :grimacing::grimacing:

TPOs of IC… even just… “The Parliament of Index Coop.”

Anyways looking forward to the creative ideas for this. :fire::fire::fire:


@Pepperoni_Joe Just noting that most of the discussion here has been directed towards the Wise Owls, with very little discussion done on the Pods and Nest structure. I would suggest separating these two topics in order to make sure appropriate attention and feedback is given to each topic.


While wise owls is not a particularly s*** name, it could potentially bring confusion to any outside parties. I think a clear and easy to understand name for this particular group would be the Index Council.

As the definition of a council is ‘a group of people who come together to consult, deliberate, or make decisions’; this would clearly communicate the general purpose and remit of this newly elected group.


i tend to agree that simple, clear is the way to go, :heavy_plus_sign: to Index Council


Jumping straight into some comments/feedback – may be a bit outdated based on Joe’s latest reply.

This is paired with feedback/convo during today’s leadership forum call, and the general tenor is one of bonhomie, despite the terse writing :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: very well will loop back here with more thoughts.

Noted – though I do think that if we hope that this structure alleviates the decision making problems, this is exactly where the rubber meets the road.

Getting clear delegated decision making right (really, getting MVP out and iterating) is what should really make a difference.

agree agree agree, one of the biggest risks. Though i’d sharpen it to, “getting the right things done.”

"All else being equal, the fastest company in any market will win. Speed is a defining characteristic — if not the defining characteristic — of the leader in virtually every industry you look at."

via: Speed as a Habit

While I agree that an enumerated list is not ideal, I do think that broad principles make sense and actually set up this group for success.

Those principles will make clear what the community expects of them and as such, will offer some guidance as the vote occurs.

why 2 mechanisms? what is the thinking there?

This timeline seems very aggressive and unrealistic – I doubt that a newly formed group will be able deliver “Prioritized list of roles for FT hiring shared with the community” ~48 hours after being formed.


I strongly support this initiative.

The biggest threat we’re collectively facing is an inability to make decisions in a reasonable time frame to address issues and to push the business forward. Traditional startups that aren’t nimble…die. I see no reason DAOs will be any different.

This initiative will help us better unblock, prioritize, and decide - all while instilling a healthy balance of guardrails, accountability, and discipline.

Well done, team.