Here is the [Discussion] on ‘Creating subCategories, subCaterory Crews and Roles on Discourse’ based on @Continental initial post.
Please feel free to point out anything that we might have missed.
In addition, there is another [Discussion] regarding ‘Proposal and Voting Rules’ that complements this post.
I know that we’re already in the process of appointing subCategory Crews. With this post and subsequent proposal, we can formalize the decision.
1. Proposal Purpose:
The main goals for this proposal are to structure the creation of future proposals in Discourse, help assign persons in charge of streamlining the process, and have contacts in each subDAO who can be approached by everyone in the community if there are questions regarding processes in Discourse, the status of proposals or votes or regarding funding.
2. Grape Proposal Overview:
If accepted, the following will be in effect after the vote closes:
subCategories on Discourse reflect the subDAO structure 1:1. Any subDAO has its own subCategory.
Current subCategories are:
a. Community Events
b. Development
c. Research/Education
d. Design/Video
e. Moderation
Posts in subCategories are visible to all DAO members.
Only members of the subDAOs can create new posts in their subCategories.
Every subDAO has a subCategory Crew responsible for organizing and prioritizing the subDAO’s proposals to the DAO (decisions that are not solely within the subDAO’s purview).
Each subCategory Crew is appointed by the respective subDAO leader:
a. President: The President is head of the DAO subCategory. Main tasks are quality control and prioritization of proposals that are intended to be voted upon.
b. Secretary: Their main task is communication with the community and the DAO members who want to propose something within the subCategory.
c. Treasurer: Their main task is to manage the budget of the subCategory.
The President of a subCategory determines which subDAO proposals are ready to be voted upon, creates them, and ensures that all necessary criteria are met.
Emissions [TBD] dedicated to the respective subDAO are allocated for the compensation of the respective subDAO Crews.
Grape team members should not be able to take the roles of the President or Secretary.
Hi paws, thanks for the write up, I’ve been waiting for this. Just give my thoughts below.
Purpose: I can understand why there is a need for streamlining the process of proposals, discourse and allows a central contact person to be engaging with the community.
You mention the subcategories reflect the subdao 1;1 however you have included design & video in the same subdao, they are not. There is a design and videography subdao separately.
Further, the CC subdao is also not listed here. For example, myself and barndog. I know there is some slight overlap in these subdaos but its fair to say I am not a videographer or a designer.
Yes
Yes
So the subdao crew will be responsible for the subdaos proposals to the dao, what about the actual running of the subdao?
“Each subCategory Crew is appointed by the respective subDAO leader:”
The CC subdao does not have a subdao leader, we ‘had’ a group of 7 people discussing to make decisions for the entire subdao in the name of efficiency. Since this structure no longer exists, would (1)the subdao just self allocate into these roles among ourselves? Or (2) the dao to select one of the CC members as subdao leader.
the roles you outlined are clear, though in future we should look to expand these roles for more clarity. For eg, the secretary is responsible for submitting that form to the dao to update them.
Can you give a clearer distinction between the president of the subcategory and the subdao leader please.
Will both of these roles exist simultaneously or the president will take over the subdao leader? You cant have two people driving the same car.
I believe emissions need to be finalized before any voting happens. I do not know what im putting my hand up for if the compensation is not adequate of the time ,effort and responsibility.
Sure, but why did you leave out treasurer?
It might be easier because the team has direct access to the overall grape funds. It would be more ‘decentralised’ if the subdao controlled its own funds.
The funds would not move from the team into the treasures wallet, just that the treasurer will communicate with the team member to let them know, hey, for this month these members get their pay, we have 2k grape comp send to this wallet etc.
Awesome! Thanks for the feedback. That’s what we actually need here since if we vote on something that important, everyone should instantly understand it.
I took the subDAO listing from the documentation and the 1:1 relation should imply that any subDAO that has a leader also has a subCategory in Discourse. Maybe this phrasing would make more sense:
subCategories on Discourse reflect the subDAO structure 1:1. Any subDAO with a subDAO leader also has its own subCategory.
The actual running of the subDAO is incumbent upon the subDAO leader. He is responsible for the operational side of the subDAO.
Maybe this clarifies it a bit more:
Every subDAO has a subCategory Crew responsible for organizing and prioritizing the subDAO’s proposals to the DAO in Discourse (decisions that are not solely within the subDAO’s purview).
The subDAO should appoint a leader imo. Since one official contact makes things way easier, even if you internally operate the way you’re used to.
I adopted the role names from @Continental. Maybe we rename President to Director.
My idea regarding the subDAO Crew is that they are mainly focused on Discourse and the related, more formal tasks. The subDAO leader remains responsible for the entire subDAO and has the freedom to heavily focus on operational tasks regarding the subDAO’s main objectives.
You are absolutely correct. That’s why I only took a placeholder and there were no suggestions yet.
We could add the treasurer, sure. I thought in terms of practicality, excluding the Grape team members now would only complicate things. This could change when we switch to on-chain voting and contracts releasing the funds.
If you @MetaVerse_Explorer or anyone else has some additional thoughts, please, don’t hesitate to formulate your ideas, or rephrase my suggestions.
I am for the name change of “Director” over the president. Seems better suited for the tasks at hand.
-It is my view that many people currently leading (or main players in) the sub-DAOs already have a lot on their plate, so I would caution that making the ‘duties’ as apparent as possible…perhaps even having a testing phase with only one subDAOs before implementing GRAPE-wide. This would give us an opportunity to see what works and what doesn’t because I feel this structure might not fit in all subDAOs current method of action.
I agree with Meta, that emissions should be finalized before anyone agrees to take on said roles so that we have a community making informed decisions rather than it causing issues down the line.
Its possible we only need one Treasurer to handle everything for the DAO – but we 100% need someone handling this role that is voted and acknowledged by the community
Agree on Director 100% over president. Secretery is also something we should add in each subDAO. After the last call the Researcher subDAO agreed on rotating each week until we get 1-2 permanent members filling the role.
Absolutely, cant be a treasurer if you dont have a spreadsheet and the numbers dont add up.
Yes, the treasurer cannot just be chosen under the table while the secretary and president are voted on.
one treasurer is only needed, same as 1 pres and sec.
Thanks again for the effort put into this CryptoPawz! I also think there should be one DAO treasurer. This will allow better coordination.
Now, in regards to all three roles I think it is important to create a job description that will allow the
the presidents, secretaries, and treasurer to understand their responsibilities and for the DAO to be able to objectively assess performance. Some are already mentioned I am just adding them in my format.
IMO:
Secretary: Responsible for general subDAO documentation
SubDAO weekly recaps on actions and goals (the form that should be completed has already been shared by myself to every SubDAO)
communication of SubDAO applicants and upkeep of application-acceptance proceedure
Organising SubDAO specific votes like removals for inactive members and allocation
President: Responsible for the success of their SubDAO
Main person responsible for general DAO-SubDAO communication
Setting short term tasks and long term goals
General SubDAO quality control
Proposal creation
Treasurer responsible for:
the Epoch emission numbers
Specific allocations to each SubDAO.
grants/scholarships
NFT management (?) in cooperation with Researchers (?)
I may have missed other responsibilities. Please comment below if anybody has ideas so we create these job descriptions with precise responsibilities to set our expectations.
SubDAO Categories labels: Agreed (Suggested change: Design/Video to Creative)
All DAO members can view subCategories posts: Agreed
Only subDAO members can create subCategories posts: Agreed
Every subDAO must manage SubDAO proposals: Agreed
Each subCategory is appointed by the respective subDAO leader:
Disagree on 6 on appointing single individuals to “Lead” or “SubOrdinate” roles. Proposal here is to change role type to “SubDAO Council” and make the roles uniform, equal in hierarchy, responsibilities and expectations, whilst also ensuring limitations that enable autonomy without enabling the manipulation or corruption from any single counterpart. Operationally, it’s far more “efficient” to rely on a single point contact, but also operationally, leaves no redundancies and diminishes inclusiveness.
IMHO, DAO orgs should be as flat as possible without sacrificing for operational execution efficiency - Roles of “President”, “Crew”, “Secretary”, & “Treasurer” should be responsibilities duplicately supported by 2 or more individuals, interchangeably, with oversight from each other and with the full transparency to the SubDAO and RootDAO. “Treasurer” in a SubDAO should be limited in scope and maintained by this small “SubDAO Council”. SubDAOs are smaller and more nimble than RootDAO. If we proceed with this single lead model, this implies a Delegated Proof of Stake or Popularity/Reputation, instead of Productivity, which there are proven and inherent vulnerabilities in the former models.
Proposed Change Summary to #6:
“SubDAO Council” is one role that facilitates Crew, President, Secretary and Treasurer roles, and requires at least 2 individuals, but no more than 5 - subject to candidate vote by the subDAO and acceptance/voluntary role of each individual candidate. All decisions, documentation and execution responsibilities are equally bestowed upon any “Council” member and each member has the right to dispute the decision of another council member which can be brought to a vote in the SubDAO and/or escalated to the Root DAO for dispute resolution either on a DAO vote or RootDAO Council vote.
SubDAO Prioritization - SubDAO councils
Emissions [TBD] dedicated to the respective subDAO are allocated for the compensation of the respective subDAO Council.
Grape team members should not be able to take the roles of the President or Secretary. See proposed changes on #6 - where this would restrict SubDAO membership to no more than 1 Team member per SubDAO council.
Thanks for adding your ideas for the responsibilities of the Crew roles @Dim_Selk . It showed me, that we need to be a bit more precise in regards to the role definitions (Leader, President|Director, Secretary, Treasurer) and their general focus.
@Arximedis My initial reasoning regarding letting the subDAO leader decide was that
a) the Crew roles are intended for organizational tasks only, without any real ‘power’ and
b) the subDAO leader is responsible for managing the subDAO and it seems prudent that he is allowed to decide who is helping him with this.
You are making a good point though and by changing to a subDAO council, we could potentially avoid
unpleasant power games, or at least make them more unlikely.
This is a fundamental question though since my approach was more like an addition to the existing structure in the sense that the subDAO Crews would’ve been responsible for the formal/organizational tasks whereas the rest of the subDAO could focus on the operational part.
Thanks for all the constructive feedback so far. I’ll update the proposal for the DAO meeting and maybe prepare two versions.