It’s a good idea to get different eyes on the protocol that may see things from a different perspective. This is not only good for decentralization but for the DAO community to have advocacy and representation.
I would nominate Minamona, Relent/Solitude, Alacrity, thr33, NoahErgo and im sure im forgetting a few other excellent contributors. This is definitely one of the more intelligent and democratic discord/DAO communities I’ve been apart of and i think Indigo is very lucky to have so many brilliant minds contributing daily.
These are all excellent points. One thing I love about this community is there’s a lot of us that are comfortable playing devils advocate. What’s even more surprising is that rather than get defensive the Lab actually welcomes it.
To your points:
Technically we could have any number of organically formed PWGs with our without the DAOs approval. Honestly i think what this proposal is attempting to establish many of us in the discord have been doing all along.
Im not sure what other options there are. I don’t think the Lab is willing to choose because they want a decentralized solution.
3A. Id say is possible but not likely. We would shut them down and vote them out pretty quickly i think.
3B. Likely not. If people are in Indigo they are not dumb or blind. DYOR is a mantra here and receipts matter when you’re trying to lay something down as fact.
3C. & 3D. I think any PWG member discussions should one way or the other be public and open for scrutiny with full transparency.
All excellent topics for discussion.
Additional considerations.
If the PWG is needed to round up temp check proposals and submit them for on chain voting, who is putting up the 100 indy for each on chain proposal? Are PWG members just going $Indy broke for the DAO if votes come out of the woodworks against things that appeared to have support in the forum?
If there is a 100 Indy cost to propose the removal of a PWG member is this a disincentive to keeping members honest. If members get voted in and out regularly who pays for these on chain proposals?
Anywho. Great points @Swoops, I like your thinking.
1. If the PWG is unpaid why does it even need authorization from the DAO?
There is no ‘need’ but I think the question is more why is it desired? I think the answer to that is that appointed sub-groups have a strong history of being how large communities / stakeholder groups efficiently and effectively operate. An informal group could in theory form to achieve good results and hopefully that will happen too; but having a more formal structure has historically helped ensure a more consistent flow of beneficial outputs.
2. Do we want to select PWG members utilizing a popularity contest style nomination process?
Labs has suggested a nomination structure because it is a common way for willing and able folks to be identified – and someone could nominate themselves. Not sure there are better options - random selection or centralized selection have downsides too.
3A: Will it contribute to a monopolization of powers and discourage other groups from contributing?
The PWG is just a first working group. It has been suggested since there has been a lot of discussion of protocol economics and rewards in Discord and the Forum. Any number of working groups can be formed; likely a Technology Working Group made up of coders should also exist at some point in the near future for example. Really just up to the DAO to identify the best way to use the structure of a working group to harness various community skills and interests to advance the protocol.
3B: Will it increase undesirable information asymmetries amongst DAO members?
Good question. The PWG members could make their meetings public to assist with that, and the Temp Check certainly assumes that the PWG would present its ideas to the larger community.
3C: How will the greater DAO be able to audit PWG?
Not sure what would need to be audited, but if you more mean oversight I would expect the PWG to be very responsive to requests for involvement from the larger community. Of course the DAO could vote to impose additional formal structures; but I think we should see how it operates for a while before imposing any formalities to how the PWG might operate.
3D: Will DAO members be able to attend PWG meetings, maybe just without speaking rights?
It would be up to the PWG members to make that happen, but that is common and seems reasonable.
Good points about the INDY needed to launch a Proposal.
Fortunately it is not needed for a Temp Check in the Forum, so is not a bar to new ideas. Seems to me that if a PWG Temp Check (or a DAO member Temp Check to control the PWG) hits the mark with some members of the DAO, that someone will step up to move it on to being an on-chain Proposal (since the INDY is returned if the vote passes and is only lost if the Proposal fails).
I really appreciate the thoughtful analysis and replys @Spuds and @Blockfan!
Soo happy our community can engage like this and help develop the protocol in meaningful ways. If we can continue to cultivate these types of conversations there are no limits to where Indy can go!
Hi, this proposal sounds great! I must say I have not been much active in the Indigo discord recently as the new stuff was quite diluted in everyday chat. This could be a great opportunity to hear what´s up concerning the planned news or developing ideas. I wonder if we really need to make a minimalistic group or we could put all interested on board and let the natural selection to do the job as many might not show up in the end. I would be just grateful to have the chance to connect and hear others talk if I do not have a strong oppinion on the given topic. It would be a great way to learn. That said, I would be glad to volunteer . I agree at least one person from the team sounds great to make the meetings productive. Relent, Spuds, thr33, Minamona, Jwolf all fit well, I think diwalost and solitude are quite active too
Honestly I could nominate a whole bunch of people but I’m still not sure exactly what qualifications we are looking for and what the role entails. I gather from the proposal these people would be good at thinking outside the box, discussing and proposing new UI/UX features, theoretical stress testing protocol design features or proposals, but what else. What exactly are we looking for in PWG nominees?
IOG just announced they will be looking to establish Working Groups and it sounds like they are going to have a few different ones that specialize in different areas. We can have multiple WG’s I assume so how will this group be specialized or different for others.
Yeah good question. If the meetings will be public I will be grateful to join and listen. I do not think this is exactly hiring (for unpaid position) but it would be sensible for people to have experience from other chains with similar types of protocols (DeFi in general) to be aware of the risks that are involved and also knowing the history of failures or issues in other protocols (not my case unfortunately). Also should mean the persons know very well how the protocol works right now and have oppinions on how that should be amended to be more robust. I think the first topic to start with could be correcting and specifying exactly the rewards equation and validating that people get to the same result - perhaps also resulting in a web calculator? I assume this could be marked as a priority for many people and based on the comments from Indigo team something they want the help with.
Great idea. I mostly agree with what others already said. But I would add two points.
I) I think it is a good idea that this position is and will remain unpaid. I understand that a paid position incentivizes good behavior and creates a professional environment, but money usually attracts people who are just after the money. But at this early stage, I think it’s best to keep this position unpaid. That way we can make sure we have people in the working group who are already familiar with the protocol and have an honest interest in improving it. If they do a good job, we can think about rewarding them later.
II) Second, I think it’s best practice to have at least one member of the Indigo Labs team on the PWG call for the first few weeks to make sure things are off to a good start. Once we feel that the PWG has a good, organized workflow, we don’t need that anymore. The PWG can run on its own.
That being said, I love how active the Indigo community is and I am very excited about the next discourse and the next steps forward.
Thank you to everyone who contributed their thoughts and ideas towards this Temp Check. There have been some really great suggestions and it’s clear the community would be in favor of a PWG. We’ll move this to a poll now and have a follow up process to formally elect specific PWG candidate members if/when the formation proposal is approved and ratified on chain.
Hey @Spuds - Appreciate the concern and you are right that there is not a great deal of definition at the moment by design. The focus would be on “rewards structures, fees structures, economic incentives, safeguards, etc., that form the features and desired economic logic of the Protocol.” That certainly can be refined by the PWG members but the Labs team felt in the end that it was best to be general so that the DAO and PWG members could let the roles evolve. And at the end of the day it is a volunteer gig.
But I would say that it seems common with other DeFi protocols to also create a Developer Working Group comprised of coders who can focus on more technical issues (architecture, systems, etc.) and Community or Education Working Groups to focus on outreach and education. Perhaps we can track what IOG or other projects have done. But for now, I think that this is a good starting place.
I think this is a fantastic proposal. It offers the ability for members of the community to directly contribute to the the ideation within the DAO. It also has a direct democratic lever in place to hold representative accountable.
I’m definitely in favor of this. Well done @EC_ATX !
. I agree at least one person from the team sounds great to make the meetings productive. Relent, Spuds, thr33, Minamona, Jwolf all fit well, I think diwalost and solitude are quite active too 