by 0xede451f92a655e4f317ae520cce70939a6602a71 (Doggo)
GSS = Grant Support Squad
GAS = Grant Accountability Squad
Right now the only grant accountability is judged by the GSS. The GSS’s job is to support grantees in the execution of their grant, however at the moment they are also tasked with judging what should be sent to the revocation committee. In order to relieve some of the workload of the GSS and specify goals of each squad, I propose making a new GAS who’s primary focus is keeping grantees accountable. The main duties of this squad would be going over financial statements, checking grants for metrics of success, and updating the community on the current status of grants. We have all seen corruption run rampant in the DAO and there are currently hardly any repercussions for bad actors. In the current system, We rely on the community to identify grant abuse and report it, this report then may or may not be passed on to the revocation committee with little to no transparency. This is a broken system because it relies on the abuse to be so outrageous community members take it upon themselves to try and get something done. The GAS would serve as a committee that actively seeks out grant abuse, checks in on the status of every grant, and updates the community in a clear and transparent way. Payment and personnel will be determined in later rounds of this proposal. Please write opinions in the comments.
Voting yes, with the intention that anyone working within this squad will require the technical/business knowledge to validate proposals, anything subjective should still be left to a DAO vote, but there should be ways to stop things that are technically infeasible/pointless - like the mana DEX that skimmed fees.
afaik there is only 1 squad the GSS on payroll can you name another? This relieves some of their duties. The GSS doesnt ask for any metrics of success, payment info, etc. The GSS is meant to play a support role for grantees not hold them accountable. This proposal would make it easier for the community to understand how a project is doing and to see real tangible data that reflects that. Again the GSS does not even look for grant abuse currently it is up the community so a mute point on “let them do their job”
I mean squad comittees and all the other stuff you know exactly what i mean but choose to pinpoint my mistakes. keep in mind english isnt my first language.
as far as I know there are units taking grants, facilitation im not sure, dao comittee, revo gss
I think if we continue like this everyone is gonna end up in a team doing something to maintain the dao while there is no room for real grantees tryna build anymore.
this is a horrible take considering how grants have been going imo. “Real” grantees havent provided close to what the GSS, and DAO committee have. revo committee is paid by job as is wearable curators. Maybe do a little research before commenting incorrect things?
You asked who on comittee is on salary i provided your answer and then you said but yeah they like curators, what does that matter if they are like curators or are like aliens are they getting paid? yes.
There has been talk of a finance committee and probably others. While I do not disagree with your reasoning @dogman, I don’t believe another squad is the answer. I do believe that there should be more accountability with what we currently have. While they may be there to support the grantees, when deadlines aren’t being met and action points aren’t being completed (you can see this very easily on notion and all the empty spaces not completed) it should be easy for them to come to the conclusion to have it reviewed especially if a community member brings it up.
I’m going to flip to no for now, I think this has generated some really good discussion and would like to follow through with some of the process improvements being discussed in the discord before we identify further gaps that need to be filled.
I do think there is an argument that it may be a full time job to research and verify grant feasibility, but not sure if that is something we can expect to succeed in until the other squads processes have had iterations and time to be fully fleshed out.
The discussions about accountability are still in a nascent stage (well, not really… but have just recently resurfaced)… we have yet to hear from the GSS about this topic. I think this is too preemptive and impulsive. I am also not in favor of dumping more DAO money on yet another squad. I voted no to the renewal of the GSS, Revocations committee, and Strategic unit… voting no on this.
I do think that there is a lot to improve on how things currently works when it comes to grant feasibility, accountability and abuse prevention. Just not convinced that it needs a new Squad for this. With the current amount of grant requests and active grants, this shouldn’t be that much work for someone on the GSS to handle. It just needs to be clearly defined as a responsibility.
I also don’t think that another Squad will do much in terms of stopping corruption and abuse. That is clearly an issue of the current voting system and VP distribution imho.
DAO is already paying a lot to GSS, another squad would be extra expenses.
I think accountability should be part of GSS job, because what are they otherwise doing? Having monthly meetings together with grantees and laughing together about how they are draining DAO?
Thank you for bringing this issue to the forefront and the way you are thinking is heading us in the right direction. With so many squads/committees and so much money going toward those paid positions, I would prefer a review of duties and better distribution of those responsibilities’ vs creating another layer. For now, I am voting NO, but we should continue to discuss accountability and defining what that means and looks like in an effort to appease community satisfaction.
you know exactly what i mean but choose to pinpoint my mistakes. keep in mind english isnt my first language.
maybe, but maaybbeee right here