@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.
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
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
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 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 if you read a name suggestion that really resonates. If there are a few popular options - we will go to the polls.
@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.
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.
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.
Does this apply to individuals within the group or the group as a whole (or both?). Concern would be that if the decision making power is handed over to that group, and they are disbanded, there will be a period similar to the current one where Coop has lack of direction. Do you think it’s sufficient incentive alignment if only individuals can be removed via this process?
Overall seems like the community has aligned around a proven model and it’s up to the Coop to now make it their own, which is a positive outcome. I hope it means each WG is empowered to take their specialities and run with them, becoming less constrained or unsure, and therefore delivering to the max of their capability.
@gregdocter the thinking behind including this mechanism both for community vote and IIP was that it is important that Wise Owls be accountable both to the community AND token holders. On reflection, I think the 55% threshold is potentially too low, and puts the Wise Owls in a pretty precarious position - this is something I imagine we will change for future iterations.
@DarkForestCapital in this interim “experimental” phase I have intentionally left the mechanism broad/flexible to ensure either specific Wise Owls, or the group in its entirety can be replaced. Given that disbanding of the Wise Owls risks leading to further paralysis (like we have now) I have faith that the community and IIP holders will appreciate this, and act responsibly if they ever start to consider replacing one, or all of the Wise Owls.
It would be wrong of me to impose deliverables on the Wise Owls before they are formed. However, whilst it is certainly an aggressive timeline, it is not an unrealistic one as I would like to see Wise Owls move extremely quickly to address Full Time Hiring needs - a developing an initial prioritised list could probably be hashed out in their first meeting.
Will just touch on this as I brought it up! I think there is huge potential in this and we are hearing of other DAO’s also looking at this model with great interest.
Fully agree with @Pepperoni_Joe though that we need a decision-making group now and so as not to be a distraction in the immediate term, let’s keep it off the radar and resurface at least until the “Wise Owls” have settled in. From there I’m happy to collaborate with anyone else interested in looking into it.