💰

Grants Committee Weekly May 3, 2022

Attendance
Date
May 3, 2022
Last Edited Time
May 3, 2022
Last edited by
Note-taker
Recording
Multi-select
Action Items from Previous Meeting:
Icedcool to spearhead async KPI flow
  • pretty close to complete, need to get GC feedback
links to write snapshot proposal for guild/project funding
Icedcool to make an announcement in announcements channel
 
Accounting:
We are still between seasons, so this section will be skipped
  • Bank for the remaining of the season:
  • Average BANK per week left :
  • Grants Committee Funding tracking
 
Discussion:
PM Guild reloaded
It was brought to our attention that there was some confusion about what was being voted for last season.
  • some GC members thought they were voting to instantiate a PM guild with no funding
  • some GC members thought they were voting on the forum proposal above (with financial implications of 220,000 BANK)
 
As a result, links has drafted up a document on GC Voting Procedures:
⚖️
Voting Procedures
all grants committee members to weigh in on voting procedures
 
VOTE: Do you agree to fund a Project Management Guild as stated in this proposal? https://forum.bankless.community/t/founding-a-project-management-guild-2-0/3251
  • Yes: Icedcool, jameswmontgomery, lion917
  • No: Chuck
  • Abstain: Rene, links
THE PROPOSAL PASSES
 
Retroactive funding?
  • does this need to be voted on? it was voted on by previous Grants Committee and we are simply honouring their agreement
  • DECISION: this funding does not need to be voted on, it should be disbursed
 
Grants committee quorum
Issue: Seasonal specs on snapshot show us having a quorum of 5, but the Grants Committee has operated in the past with a quorum of 4
  • wat do?
    • Iced opinion - Forum post, acknowledging our short coming and ask for acceptance from the DAO. If disputed, we fix it.
  • quorum and vote passing
    • quorum = the amount of people present
    • vote passing = the amount of people it takes to pass proposals
  • What about abstention?
    • if too many people abstain, it goes to snapshot
    • how many is too many? 3
 
PROPOSAL: Vote clarifications
  • If a member of Grants Committee is a named role holder, they must abstain
  • 3 or more abstentions means that the proposal must go to Snapshot
  • We have a quorum of 5 people - which means 5 people must be present to conduct business
  • We use simple majority to pass votes (>50% of all votes, not including abstentions)
VOTES
  • Yes: Icedcool, Rene, links, jameswmontgomery, lion917, Chuck
  • No:
  • Abstain:
THE PROPOSAL PASSES
 
Proxy voting?
  • we need some verifiable way to ensure that the proxy is valid
 
Async Voting
 
Question: should we use async voting?
 
  • async voting could change our committee drastically
    • we’re following a parliamentary system - we have some sort of discussion, etc
    • so this could be a big change of our system, perhaps less democratic
  • concern: voting should happen after discussion
    • we will continue to have weekly discussion
    • discussion could happen on the forums as well - Grants Committee should be reading proposals
    • don’t want to rob ourselves of the opportunity to discuss things in a synchronous, transparent way
    • IDEA: How about we set any poll that has dispute goes to sync discussion?
    • IDEA: How about having a poll option to discuss, and that will be sent to sync discussion?
  • proxy voting: a poll gated by role would allow us to accomplish this
    • in fact it allows ALL votes to be captured in text form
  • concern: would it make the live meetings useless?
  • concern: would it cause people to “mail it in” i.e. not do a good job?
    • it’s important to vote in person in public
      • proxy voting and async voting remove accountability from this committee
    • proposals are strengthened by context - this is of benefit to the DAO
    • our contributors deserve to have their day - a live audience
  • Accountability is important, but does meeting synchronously = accountability?
  • We are stretched as a committee - 30+ proposals a season and 1hr/wk is not enough
    • we need to figure out ways to increase our capacity = async tooling
    •  
Rene to make a thread on this for async discussion
james to get the document ready to vote on next week
grants committee members to weigh in on the doc
💰

Grants Committee Weekly May 3, 2022

Attendance
Date
May 3, 2022
Last Edited Time
May 3, 2022
Last edited by
Note-taker
Recording
Multi-select
Action Items from Previous Meeting:
Icedcool to spearhead async KPI flow
  • pretty close to complete, need to get GC feedback
links to write snapshot proposal for guild/project funding
Icedcool to make an announcement in announcements channel
 
Accounting:
We are still between seasons, so this section will be skipped
  • Bank for the remaining of the season:
  • Average BANK per week left :
  • Grants Committee Funding tracking
 
Discussion:
PM Guild reloaded
It was brought to our attention that there was some confusion about what was being voted for last season.
  • some GC members thought they were voting to instantiate a PM guild with no funding
  • some GC members thought they were voting on the forum proposal above (with financial implications of 220,000 BANK)
 
As a result, links has drafted up a document on GC Voting Procedures:
⚖️
Voting Procedures
all grants committee members to weigh in on voting procedures
 
VOTE: Do you agree to fund a Project Management Guild as stated in this proposal? https://forum.bankless.community/t/founding-a-project-management-guild-2-0/3251
  • Yes: Icedcool, jameswmontgomery, lion917
  • No: Chuck
  • Abstain: Rene, links
THE PROPOSAL PASSES
 
Retroactive funding?
  • does this need to be voted on? it was voted on by previous Grants Committee and we are simply honouring their agreement
  • DECISION: this funding does not need to be voted on, it should be disbursed
 
Grants committee quorum
Issue: Seasonal specs on snapshot show us having a quorum of 5, but the Grants Committee has operated in the past with a quorum of 4
  • wat do?
    • Iced opinion - Forum post, acknowledging our short coming and ask for acceptance from the DAO. If disputed, we fix it.
  • quorum and vote passing
    • quorum = the amount of people present
    • vote passing = the amount of people it takes to pass proposals
  • What about abstention?
    • if too many people abstain, it goes to snapshot
    • how many is too many? 3
 
PROPOSAL: Vote clarifications
  • If a member of Grants Committee is a named role holder, they must abstain
  • 3 or more abstentions means that the proposal must go to Snapshot
  • We have a quorum of 5 people - which means 5 people must be present to conduct business
  • We use simple majority to pass votes (>50% of all votes, not including abstentions)
VOTES
  • Yes: Icedcool, Rene, links, jameswmontgomery, lion917, Chuck
  • No:
  • Abstain:
THE PROPOSAL PASSES
 
Proxy voting?
  • we need some verifiable way to ensure that the proxy is valid
 
Async Voting
 
Question: should we use async voting?
 
  • async voting could change our committee drastically
    • we’re following a parliamentary system - we have some sort of discussion, etc
    • so this could be a big change of our system, perhaps less democratic
  • concern: voting should happen after discussion
    • we will continue to have weekly discussion
    • discussion could happen on the forums as well - Grants Committee should be reading proposals
    • don’t want to rob ourselves of the opportunity to discuss things in a synchronous, transparent way
    • IDEA: How about we set any poll that has dispute goes to sync discussion?
    • IDEA: How about having a poll option to discuss, and that will be sent to sync discussion?
  • proxy voting: a poll gated by role would allow us to accomplish this
    • in fact it allows ALL votes to be captured in text form
  • concern: would it make the live meetings useless?
  • concern: would it cause people to “mail it in” i.e. not do a good job?
    • it’s important to vote in person in public
      • proxy voting and async voting remove accountability from this committee
    • proposals are strengthened by context - this is of benefit to the DAO
    • our contributors deserve to have their day - a live audience
  • Accountability is important, but does meeting synchronously = accountability?
  • We are stretched as a committee - 30+ proposals a season and 1hr/wk is not enough
    • we need to figure out ways to increase our capacity = async tooling
    •  
Rene to make a thread on this for async discussion
james to get the document ready to vote on next week
grants committee members to weigh in on the doc