You are the one who made the statement. I am simply highlighting it.
lol, ok. If that is how you want to respond and represent yourself, go for it. Roles and responsibilities of units are included in Grants. Take the Code of Ethics for example, it references generally responsibility for moderation, not the Facilitation squad. Proposals should outlive specific units.
The key aspect of this proposal is that it sets guidelines for the chartās content and mandates accountability at the governance level, specifying which Core Units are responsible for its upkeep.
I am talking about Organizational Chart not accountability squad.
- Governance Squad with Strategic Unit will update the Organizational Chart whenever thereās a new Core Unit or other changes in the DAOās structure. Strategic Unit will provide a write-up which will be added to the chart.
This already outlines my responsibility to update the chart and provide write-up to Governance Squad. Please read more attentively what is written there.
Yes, which belongs in your unitās Grant Proposal, not a Binding Governance Proposal. If it was general, and established it as a core responsibility of the DAO to maintain an up to date version of this chart, to ensure transparency, accountability and ease of onboarding, it would establish the institutional pathway and prerogative for this responsibility, that you would fill in your role as a member of the Strategic Unit.
That would create an accretive governance policy and still provide an argument for the relevancy of your role in the process. Even though this chart already exists and has been published in several different formats over the past year.
You are writing many things but the fact is that DAO doesnt have this chart on its website. Nothing will be perfect, there is always something to consider.
It was my initiative that I moved from poll to governance stage, hope it will pass. Its wild that with different core units which DAO has paid significant amounts of money we still donāt have it as well as there is inaccurate and outdated documentation on Decentraland website on how DAO works.
How much $ already received grant based Core Units:
Governance Squad: 471,360$ (this amount does not include a new grant of 187,504 $)
Grant Support Squad: 187,200$ (this amount does not include a new grant of 114,600 $)
Facilitation Squad: 153, 000$ (this amount does not include a new grant of $98,500 $)
Agree. We should put the chart on the DAOs website. And agree, your role compiling it from existing sources and adding the most updated information for the DAO would be great. All I said initially was that for this to be a robust policy it should be generalized, so it would stand the test of time.
And yes, I do say things.
If we are talking about something perfect, then yes. I want to tell you more: the text on the Decentraland website(regarding DAO at least) must be approved and shouldnāt be changed by anyone without DAO consent IMO.
Also, in the Grants Program proposals, there are specific Core Units pointed out in the implementation pathway that are grant-based and can also disappear.
https://governance.decentraland.org/proposal/?id=77475620-7b74-11ed-ad27-015f26e7c35c
I voted to revoke your position on the basis that you have not fulfilled the requirements specified, simple as that.
Now I am going to change my vote from YES to NO because while I believe most of it is necessary, I now understand that you are NOT the person who should recommend how that should happen. You have made comments in Discord that have further convinced me that you are just not capable of working with other committee members and have a general disrespect in public toward them. When you share repeatedly their grant money vs yours just reminds me of a new junior associate trying to challenge why the WAY MORE experienced and seasoned professional(s) makes more than you do. Itās elementary and again, convinces me that you are not capable at the level that you are trying to operate.
Organizational Chart for Decentraland DAO [Draft]
This proposal is now in status: PASSED.
Voting Results:
Can I mark as enacted as itās already done by Fehz?
No, you canāt. Please read implementation pathways section of this proposal.
I appreciate the work done by Fehz, but it lacks descriptions of the DAO Committee, Security Advisory Board, Wearables Curation Committee, and Strategic Unit, as well as the visualization to match the style of the Decentraland website.
Once Iāve made these additions, the updated content will be added to Decentralandās website documentation and the Transparency Page. After all of this is completed, you can enact this proposal.
I think I finally found a prop @web3nit took from poll to governanceā¦ however, it appears that it was identified as unneeded by both the senior DAO Committee member and the senior Facilitation squad member. On top of that, he has failed to do the work needed to complete this task.
The only other Governance prop I could find that LL ever made that was passed was a resubmission of Yemelās work word for word.
@ginoct, who do I need to convince that the qualifications for the Legislator badge need to be rethought and LLās should be revoked?
@jar0d The badges are an automated way to identify community members based on simple and easy to understand and automate criteria. Itās part of the ongoing process of becoming a more efficient and automated organization (without sacrificing safety). In this case, @web3nit meet the criteria and the badge applies to his profile. The rest of the possible interpretations are up to each one of the community members.
Thanks for the feedback!
I understand it is an automated system, but we can change the rules it follows.
Why not change the requirements so they dont reward low effort acts like promoting someone elses work from draft to governance?
What would you propose? As a decentralized organization I donāt see a problem with someone responsibly promoting someone elseās ideas in order to make them happen. Specifically in this case, LL has authored not only the resubmission but also this proposal. How would you automate if something is a high quality proposal or not?
At minimum wait until it is enacted. Passing unenactable governance, much like @Unknower is on tract to do, should not be rewarded.
Is there an update on that?
