[DAO:81be364] DAO Grant Program - Accountability Committee

Until now, the way to set up working groups, their moderation and process was something ‘ad-hoc’. They emerged precisely from discussions, threads, relevant/complex topics and the need to discuss them in an ordered and well-focused environment.

The Facilitation Squad has been supporting these working groups by setting them up and facilitating the discussion to obtain concrete outcomes. By iterating these working groups dynamic with an informal “process”, and considering each of the different experiences, we’ve discovered a pressing need to create more and better spaces for the community to exchange ideas and also a way to make more democratic the process to set up these groups. We want the different interested community members and stakeholders to take ownership in the discussions and to take a leading role to build and put together possible outputs (mainly aiming to binding governance proposals).

The new group dynamics that we’re thinking on tend to decentralize, with the figure of the ‘facilitator’ more as a default attendant, not as a core or central figure in the process or with any kind of intrinsic “power”, not only by inviting different members of the community to get involved, empowering them and promoting them to reach different outcomes or build proposals, but even more, thinking that a formal process will give everyone a transparent and concrete possibility and a pathway to propose the set up of specific working groups.

This semi-structured approach will be one way to tackle different issues, thinking in terms of efficiency and effectiveness to get concrete outcomes, but for sure will not become the exclusive one, since each community member will still have the possibility to adopt or choose other ways to channel their needs, discussions or concerns.

We think this as an optimal, not as a must. Working groups were ‘born’ as an informal way to channel specific discussions, so to formalize a working group process it’s nothing more than giving a framework and some pathways to something that was in fact already existing.

2 Likes

@Zino could you please clarify:

These two parts are explaining the same procedure but they are a bit different. It may create confusion… will the GSS send arguments to the committee “if the complaints continue” or within 4 days?

  • Once the GSS checks the objective information, will they make any recommendations for the accountability committee based on their findings? Will these arguments be available to the community?

  • Something that is not spelled out here:
    If the GSS, over the course of the grant, finds that the grantee is not responsive, misses updates, or is otherwise not complying with the terms and conditions of the grant, they will send arguments to the accountability committee requesting the grant be revoked correct?

Muchas gracias,

Hi @CheddarQueso yes, for sure.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with an answer and hope it helps address your inquiry.

  • These two parts are explaining the same procedure but they are a bit different. It may create confusion… will the GSS send arguments to the committee “if the complaints continue” or within 4 days?

The Accountability Committee starts to act when there is a formal request from any community member through a form. The Grant Support Squad will request the grantee to respond to the concerns raised within 4 days.

This means that the GSS will give 4 days to the Grantee to clarify the raised concerns.

After that, if the complaints continue, the Grant Support Squad will send, in the course of 4 days, the arguments for the Accountability Committee to evaluate the case.

So these first two steps have a duration of 8 days.

  • Once the GSS checks the objective information, will they make any recommendations for the accountability committee based on their findings? Will these arguments be available to the community?

Yes. In this first stage, we will post our arguments on the proposal as we are doing at the present.

  • Something that is not spelled out here:
    If the GSS, over the course of the grant, finds that the grantee is not responsive, misses updates, or is otherwise not complying with the terms and conditions of the grant, they will send arguments to the accountability committee requesting the grant be revoked correct?

Yes. with our arguments.

Thank you again for your questions.
Muchas gracias.

1 Like

I feel conflicted about this proposal, as there is a clear need and the spirit of the committee fills it, but I also hesitate if it should be a separate entity from the GSS. To me, it makes more sense to have these duties given to a section of the GSS maybe with a stipend per case, and expand or restructure the GSS as needed to make the workload manageable than it does to have two separate entities. Passing information from one committee to the next just creates opportunity for miscommunications that can be avoided by having the people already working closely with grantees and already responsible for accountability be given the task. I do understand the argument for the objective third party, but members of the GSS should be looking at grantees and their projects objectively regardless so it feels more unnecessary and complicated than beneficial.

1 Like

@Zino @ginoct Would it not be possible to just elect 2-3 new GSS members that are solely used for revocation cases? They do not need to be a part of any of the pre-existing responsibilities within the GSS themselves, but if there is a need then they are buzzed and the per-case compensation kicks in. That’s the only way I can see this being unbiased and not having to create a whole new committee.

DAO Grant Program - Accountability Committee

This proposal is now in status: PASSED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes 57% 6,886,464 VP (55 votes)
  • No 43% 5,379,677 VP (20 votes)

It’s really sad to see that proposal pass, Committees goes against decentralization and we should aim to the end of them, not creating more.
That proposal is still unclear.
Do all reports goes to the committee or does the GSS do a preselection, if the GSS does a preselection, then they already basically doing the decision, if they are not then it can be abused to drain the DAO by creating a unnecessary amount of reports costing 1k USD each time to the DAO

3 Likes

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:
We have all the committees necessary, HPrivakos is on most of them, but this new one, he isn’t on yet, so in that case: “too much centralization.”

This reminds me of my one of my favorite jokes: “Why was the tyrant always stressed out?
Because he claimed to believe in decentralization of power, but had so many responsibilities!”

Thou shall not ask @HPrivakos in a private message on what his plan of action is to remove his role in the Decentraland DAO. If you do, don’t worry you will never receive a response. :joy: :joy:

@HPrivakos Can we get a plan of action or a list of actions taken to move closer to decentralization? How have you moved closer to removing your roles and responsibilities to allow the DAO to become more decentralized?

2 Likes

I’m interested in hearing Lords @HPrivakos master plan - I suspect a radical idea that could revolutionize decentraland.

2 Likes

Hello Community:
Based on the comments regarding the name of the New Committee that will be in charge of revoking/pausing grants, we are opening a poll on Friday 13th so we can choose the most suitable name for it.

The options so far are:

  • “Revocations Committee”

  • “Accountability Committee”

Would you like to add any other? If so, please put it under the comments, with a brief explanation of why you think it is the most suitable, and we’ll add it to the poll list.
Regards,
Zino.

I think it should have the word Grant included in the title as it specifically deals with grant issues. Grant Accountability Committee or Grant Revocations Committee or Grant Review Squad… woops, not squad Grant Review Committee… yes.

1 Like

Hey Zino,

Please consider adding the following:
Due Diligence Committee

This has a great overall mission in its name, which accomplishes reviewing grants, its risk and reviewing its contract.

DCL DAO DDC Let’s go!

Thanks!

Maryana

4 Likes

GSS You have failed to follow your own rules here:

DAO Grant Program - Accountability Committee

This proposal has been ENACTED by a DAO Committee Member (0xbef99f5f55cf7cdb3a70998c57061b7e1386a9b0)