Index Council V2 Election Results


After the term of the inaugural Index Council ended on February 28th 2022. Index Coop contributors took time to deliberate and plan out the second iteration of the Index Council.
Fourteen contributors self nominated to serve on a V2 of the Index Council. While any version of the nominated candidates would have made for a stellar Index Council, we could only move forward with 7.

Bronze, Silver, and Gold (Gold+) Owls (as of Season 1 Owls) were all allowed to vote in the election. Voting was limited to this group as they are considered the highest context members of the Index Coop community. Choice Voting was the platform used to carry out the election, using the voting system of “Electoral Reform Society STV". This is a type of rank order voting designed to maximize the significance of each vote, reduce vote gaming and minimize the frequency of wasted votes.


Untitled design
View the results on Choice Voting here

The election ran for 72 hours, starting 28th March 2022, and ending on 31st March 2022. With 59 out of 86 owls voting in the election. The following contributors were chosen for the Index Council:

Congratulations! :tada:


Their term begins on April 1st, 2022, and will run through to September 30th, 2022.

We would like to thank all the candidates who participated in the Index Council V2 election but did not get elected for this round. We appreciate your participation and continued contribution to the Index Coop.


Shortcomings of the election

During the election, a number of shortcomings were brought forward by community members. The Governance Nest will work to address these in any upcoming elections. The three main shortcomings brought forward were:

  1. Despite being a “Electoral Reform Society STV" vote, the voting was only limited to 7 choices (in line with the seats on the Index Council), but should have allowed voters to vote for up to 14 candidates. Moving forward, voters will be allowed to rank all available candidates.

  2. Some contributors were not included in the the voters list of the election, the notable missing voters were @oneski22 and @yuan-han-li. Since they were not included in any Season 1 Nest proposals as metal owls, they were not included in this round of voting. Moving forward, a coordinated effort will be made across all nests to ensure that no eligible contributors slip through the cracks.
    cc: @bradwmorris @Pepperoni_Joe @Matthew_Graham @ElliottWatts

  3. The use of Choice Voting. Despite having used this platform for a number of previous elections and a contributor vote. Community sentiment says that we should move to a different web3 based, weighted voting system. Choice Voting also proved to be problematic for a number of voters who could not log in, due to ISP related restrictions.

The Governance Nest will endevaour to continually improve upon the Index Coop Election Process wherever possible. Any additional feedback and input is welcome in the comments below.

cc: @mel.eth


Hi All,

After reading through the Index Council election results and reading some of the fine print in previous posts it seems as though there is a re-election planned on 31st May for two seats on the Council being @Matthew_Graham and @Metfanmike. I have brought this to the attention of Governance Nest however without a clear owner I thought I would post in order to move things along.

The text in question comes from this post. The community voted no to the above question and therefore a re-election is required in May for elected members on the V2 council who also served on V1, according to the guidance thus far. I would like to put forth a community vote to dismiss this plan and instead move forward with the council that is in situ for the full 6 months, the inclusion of a mid-term re-election adds unnecessary confusion, complication and impedes the current elected members’ ability to deliver change.

In my opinion, we all voted for a new council that is to be in position until 30th September regardless of whether any members of the current council were also members of V1.

Let’s move forward and have a successful next 6 months, we don’t need another election, we need to deliver and build a successful organisation! :rocket:

  • We voted in the V2 council for a full 6 month period. They all serve until 30th September
  • No - lets stick with having a mid term re-election

0 voters

Fellow owls:
We have completed the V2 Election survey and identified action steps. Thank you to everyone who put up with our emails, forum posts, tweets, and the link-bombing of random nest meetings to get the survey out.

In short we have a 74% top two box (positive sentiment) for the election and 26% meh + negative sentiment.

TL:DR: we have room for improvement

Our objective is to turn community input into reality for ICC V3. Our watchout; We (the GovNest) needs to ensure the definition of processes do not top-down the election results vs. enabling a bottom up representation. We welcome your oversight and participation as we run down this path to a xx% righteous vote.

here is our list of intended follow up points:

  1. Continue: sending a post - election survey after each election

  2. Continue: using ranked choice + contributor vote (tool will change)

  3. Continue: using the self-nominations process plus written introduction

  4. Continue: sending email reminders for non-voters,

  5. Start: GovNest will be the Process Owner/Facilitator to build the bottom up ICC v3 proposal including: board composition, Nest representation, term length, diversity, progression towards decentralization, scope, etc.

  6. Start: Do a bottom up definition for candidate eligibility

  7. Start: Review the nomination processes - should nominations be from nests?

  8. Start: Publish the nomination / election schedule (including candidate AMA + 1 week for voting)

  9. Start: implement a quiet period (no campaigning) 24hrs before voting starts

  10. Start: Ask candidates for a TL:DR (xx characters) at the top of their manifesto

  11. Start: add a separate communication channel for voter tech / election support

  12. Start: Pilot a web3 platform ensuring all regions / community members can participate

  13. Start: Review the 4x Gold owl election weighting - ratify with community input.

We invite anyone who would like to participate in knocking down this extensive list to join us in any of the GovNest meetings which are posted on the contributor calendar.

thanks to @mel.eth @sixtykeys and @JMoss for all the help getting this done.

Really want to dig into the weeds? Here are the survey results:


Thanks for the call-out again @ElliottWatts -

Noting that the ex-v1 councilmembers (@Matthew_Graham and @Metfanmike) have both acknowledged that they understand are serving until the EO May and the ex-v1 council designed the polling that determined that. The term lengths/re-election timeframes were well-communicated in the nomination post here.

As you can probably imagine, running the poll you have is misleading in that contributors will ask whether the results are binding, and I will convey that no, forum polls are not an accepted form voting for installing a councilmember beyond the established term. This to say that while a sentiment poll is information, it is not going to affect the term length of the two contributors in question.

Per discussion in the nest meeting, the next steps were to seek to understand if the affected councilmembers would both like to serve out a full six-month term (they are tagged here, so let’s use this opportunity to drop that note if so attn: @Metfanmike and @Matthew_Graham), if yes: establish and communicate the differences to the DAO (no staggering, maybe some overlap; again was discussed in Governance Nest meeting yesterday) and then use either ChoiceVote or AltGov to get a trusted result to inform a trusted process and extend the term if that’s the will of DAO contributors.

Please feel free to come to Governance Nest meetings (Alternating Thursdays, next one 21April2022) to work on strategies for driving distributed decision-making, we’d love to have your concerns and perspectives discussed and addressed as effectively as possible!


This is awesome work @shawn16400 - It’s great to have the feedback distilled like this to drive toward actionable steps in creating a better process.