TL-DR: Update on the current governance structure and elections applications for the next cycle (S1-25);
Context:
With PIP-23 signers are empowered as councilors and are expected to become pro-active forces in Paladin through two means:
If elected / chosen by other councilors in order to lead a specific mission (Liquidity Management, Councilor Coordination, Ambassadorship, etc…)
Write proposals in order to accomplish their announced agenda over their tenure
The first cycle was a success in the sense that DAO ops have substantially progressed to a point where less than 1h a week is needed to manage everything as of now. This confirms numerous studies showing that coordination and collective intelligence decreases for groups above 7.
We have lacked the transparency documents we were expected to publish. This is because we quickly realised it was impossible to do by hand and we haven’t yet found the time to configure the required tooling sufficiently. Currently it is possible to view the DAO’s treasury entirely here, and once we have tagged all the right transactions Octav will generate the monthly transaction report, this should be ready for January. In the meantime, here is what the file looks like.
Councilmen haven’t really stepped up to a specific position as there wasn’t as much work as expected, and despite the incentives, very few have yet to take active initiatives for the DAO. To be clear, all have shown extreme availability and eagerness to help, but the current system isn’t encouraging pro-activity;
Unfortunately predicted in the original proposal, the system has killed delegation activity;
Proposed changes:
The idea was to give more free reins to councilors on daily operations while raising the barriers on high strategic impact tasks. In practice this has worked but insufficient initiative was taken. In order to make this more dynamic, we recommend conditioning Council pay to governance participation (voting in proposals).
Additionally, we will fast track the transition to on-chain governance in January. This means the 52% of the supply still controlled by the DAO and yet to be allocated will be unruggable without a full-blown governance vote.
Voting Options:
Candidates please apply in the comments
agree with the changes, applying to go for a second round as councilor. paladin has a lot of stuff coming and I believe we might have more activity than ever. I would be happy to be there for it and continue to be a part of it.
Agree with the main points of the post and I do recognize myself as one of the councilors who was an active signer but did not step up in a way that was probably planned.
I’m applying for 2nd round as councilor and willing to take whatever specific position needed. Happy to give more details to any party interested.
Missing an analysis of signers performance over the last cycle (as it was done in previous rotations), and a breakdown of council spendings vs max budget voted in PAL, especially as specific roles were not taken.
The tooling was already installed with the Den tracking bot on the old multisig channel which was deleted when council went live, and it only would have take a few minutes to re-set up & enable clear visibility, so lack of time is quite exaggerated here.
Not sure to understand what worked, despite lowering the time for weekly transactions which is obviously easier with less signers & centralized daily decisions as majority of councilors are either team members (3/7) or close to be for Tholgar team (2/7).
Note that there were delays of several weeks for delegates rewards. Were there other multisig txs that were also late/missed ? Can’t easily check since the council discord channel is still private & tracking isn’t set.
Can you explain this please ?
On the governance structure & delegation activity:
You added a rule preventing delegates to also be councilors unless one task was unpaid (which is why I couldn’t apply), and said that people can’t ask retroactive pay for proposals anymore so yes as expected the activity has drastically reduced & that’s an issue that must be solved.
Also, there was one or two months without any proposals so obviously less activity. The team was more focused on new products, and I guess the community won’t risk writing posts that might be blocked / bypassed, especially if they can’t be compensated for their work.
I think these rules should be removed and replaced by an onboarding program to avoid preventing active community members from contributing, and attract new ones.
Let’s focus on the election topic for this post & create another one for the governance activity/delegates topic
