Profile of axel_t in Optimism
Posts by axel_t
-
Season 6 Grants Council Operating Budget Proposal
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: May 29, 2024, 12:23 a.m.
Content: You just voted your 4 . 9 m OP in support increasing the budget of this Council by 170 , 000 OP, when you’ve been on this Council since it’s inception, and contributed to this latest Proposal?
You don’t think it would have been more prudent or appropriate to Abstain in your vote in this case, considering the real or perceived conflict of interest here? Further, it looks like you’ve only provided disclosure after voting?
Good thing we got rid of those Self-Dealing rules, right? Ha! And we’re about to evaporate the Code of Conduct Council soon too, by the looks of it. Ha ha ha!
Likes: 0
Replies: 2
No likes yet.
Replies:
- Gonna.eth: This is my opinion and has nothing to do with Govnerds or Grants Council.
The quorum was 26M and the proposal received 46M votes in favor. I don’t think the 4.9M from L2beat could change the outcome.
Most of the feedback I requested from Season 5 Grants Council members was on how to better split work amongst reviewers, hence the removal of the subcommittees, if the Audits subcommittee was worth a try, how to make the cycles shorter, and how they felt about the option to pause their compensations and work during a cycle if they had personal matters to attend (because I’m concerned about reviewers being burned out) which they all responded something like “if we commit to review we will meet a deadline”
- lavande: To clarify the comments about rules around self-dealing:
Self-dealing clauses are outlined in Optimist Expectations, and it is suggested that people undelegate from delegates found to be self-dealing.
Former Council members may vote on future operating budget proposals as there is no guarantee they will be elected to the future Council. Previous affiliation and contributions to the proposal were also clearly disclosed.
A Code of Conduct Council may be proposed with an adjusted budget, based on delegate feedback, in Special Voting Cycle #23b. If no Code of Conduct Council is renewed, the Rules of Engagement will continue to be enforced but by the supportNERDs rather than an elected Council.
-
Season 6 Grants Council Operating Budget
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: May 29, 2024, 12:23 a.m.
Content: You just voted your 4 . 9 m OP in support increasing the budget of this Council by 170 , 000 OP, when you’ve been on this Council since it’s inception, and contributed to this latest Proposal?
You don’t think it would have been more prudent or appropriate to Abstain in your vote in this case, considering the real or perceived conflict of interest here? Further, it looks like you’ve only provided disclosure after voting?
Good thing we got rid of those Self-Dealing rules, right? Ha! And we’re about to evaporate the Code of Conduct Council soon too, by the looks of it. Ha ha ha!
Likes: 0
Replies: 2
No likes yet.
Replies:
- Gonna.eth: This is my opinion and has nothing to do with Govnerds or Grants Council.
The quorum was 26M and the proposal received 46M votes in favor. I don’t think the 4.9M from L2beat could change the outcome.
Most of the feedback I requested from Season 5 Grants Council members was on how to better split work amongst reviewers, hence the removal of the subcommittees, if the Audits subcommittee was worth a try, how to make the cycles shorter, and how they felt about the option to pause their compensations and work during a cycle if they had personal matters to attend (because I’m concerned about reviewers being burned out) which they all responded something like “if we commit to review we will meet a deadline”
- lavande: To clarify the comments about rules around self-dealing:
Self-dealing clauses are outlined in Optimist Expectations, and it is suggested that people undelegate from delegates found to be self-dealing.
Former Council members may vote on future operating budget proposals as there is no guarantee they will be elected to the future Council. Previous affiliation and contributions to the proposal were also clearly disclosed.
A Code of Conduct Council may be proposed with an adjusted budget, based on delegate feedback, in Special Voting Cycle #23b. If no Code of Conduct Council is renewed, the Rules of Engagement will continue to be enforced but by the supportNERDs rather than an elected Council.
-
[FINAL] Code of Conduct Council (CoCC) Operating Budget for Season 6
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: May 28, 2024, 8:15 p.m.
Content: Hi @Jrocki and any else interested.
Firstly, I’m no longer part of the CoCC, won’t be running for any Season 6 position if proposal passes, and had no input or part in the current proposal being voted on. But in saying that, your final question was one that was discussed in meetings with the Foundation towards the end of Season 5 when I was a CoCC member. Thus…
The added benefit, in comparison to SupportNERDs, is that any CoCC members are elected by the Token House and accountable to the Token House. The SupportNERDs are administered or controlled by the Foundation. Thus the added benefits include (a) Reducing the control of the Foundation over the Collective (b) Increasing the control of the Token House as they elect the CoCC members and choose who they want to represent them, and can also choose via subsequent elections which members or reps to later dispose of or replace.
Ultimately, it goes back to the idea of why the CoCC was created: Originally the Foundation kept investigations in house and kinda just recommended a decision or sanction to the Token House, and the Token House didn’t like this lack of decentralisation. But at the same time, the Token House also didn’t like dedicating time, and emotional or political energy, investigating disputes and enforcing sanctions, especially when they didn’t have full information into the often anon complaints. So a CoCC was experimented with in that they acted as reps of the Token House. This could (a) allow the Foundation to transfer decision making to the wider Token House, but still (b) reduce the administrative burden on all Delegates by having a small group who could specialise and dedicate significant time to doing this work.
All in all, the CoCC acts as a shock absorber for the Foundation, Token House Delegates and even wider collective. It faces and deals with a lot of the ugly & toxic stuff in this community (Note: in Season 5 this was a daily(!) or every other day activity for more than the first half of the season. And has continued up until very, very recently, even post Season 5 ’s conclusion, although admittedly now with less frequency), all so the wider Token House can just carry on, enjoy more peace, all while just believing that ‘This is fine’ and not needing to worry about all the conflict being focused on & contained within a small subset of people.
Finally, just remembered this as well… The CoCC in Season 5 was highly qualified and had a diverse and wide breadth of experience in: web 3 governance, conflict management & alternative dispute resolution, technical and developer matters, the law and litigation, as well as commercial compliance and other industry, mandated or legislated code of conducts. In short, we were all professionals, and these qualifications and experience is not a requirement of the SupportNERDs programs.
Hope this response can provide more context. All the best.
Likes: 2
Replies: 1
Replies:
- Gonna.eth: Axel_T:
(Note: in Season 5 this was a daily(!) or every other day activity for more than the first half of the season. And has continued up until very, very recently, even post Season 5’s conclusion, although admittedly now with less frequency)
The CoC made 5 conflict reports to the token house for a vote. I did not know you handled a daily volume of claims. Maybe the CoC needs to do a cycle report or a mid-season report. I based my vote on the previous budget, conflicts reported, and additions/subtraction of responsibilities of the CoC for Season 6.
-
[Draft] Code of Conduct Council (CoCC) Operating Budget for Season 6
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: May 28, 2024, 8:15 p.m.
Content: Hi @Jrocki and any else interested.
Firstly, I’m no longer part of the CoCC, won’t be running for any Season 6 position if proposal passes, and had no input or part in the current proposal being voted on. But in saying that, your final question was one that was discussed in meetings with the Foundation towards the end of Season 5 when I was a CoCC member. Thus…
The added benefit, in comparison to SupportNERDs, is that any CoCC members are elected by the Token House and accountable to the Token House. The SupportNERDs are administered or controlled by the Foundation. Thus the added benefits include (a) Reducing the control of the Foundation over the Collective (b) Increasing the control of the Token House as they elect the CoCC members and choose who they want to represent them, and can also choose via subsequent elections which members or reps to later dispose of or replace.
Ultimately, it goes back to the idea of why the CoCC was created: Originally the Foundation kept investigations in house and kinda just recommended a decision or sanction to the Token House, and the Token House didn’t like this lack of decentralisation. But at the same time, the Token House also didn’t like dedicating time, and emotional or political energy, investigating disputes and enforcing sanctions, especially when they didn’t have full information into the often anon complaints. So a CoCC was experimented with in that they acted as reps of the Token House. This could (a) allow the Foundation to transfer decision making to the wider Token House, but still (b) reduce the administrative burden on all Delegates by having a small group who could specialise and dedicate significant time to doing this work.
All in all, the CoCC acts as a shock absorber for the Foundation, Token House Delegates and even wider collective. It faces and deals with a lot of the ugly & toxic stuff in this community (Note: in Season 5 this was a daily(!) or every other day activity for more than the first half of the season. And has continued up until very, very recently, even post Season 5 ’s conclusion, although admittedly now with less frequency), all so the wider Token House can just carry on, enjoy more peace, all while just believing that ‘This is fine’ and not needing to worry about all the conflict being focused on & contained within a small subset of people.
Finally, just remembered this as well… The CoCC in Season 5 was highly qualified and had a diverse and wide breadth of experience in: web 3 governance, conflict management & alternative dispute resolution, technical and developer matters, the law and litigation, as well as commercial compliance and other industry, mandated or legislated code of conducts. In short, we were all professionals, and these qualifications and experience is not a requirement of the SupportNERDs programs.
Hope this response can provide more context. All the best.
Likes: 2
Replies: 1
Replies:
- Gonna.eth: Axel_T:
(Note: in Season 5 this was a daily(!) or every other day activity for more than the first half of the season. And has continued up until very, very recently, even post Season 5’s conclusion, although admittedly now with less frequency)
The CoC made 5 conflict reports to the token house for a vote. I did not know you handled a daily volume of claims. Maybe the CoC needs to do a cycle report or a mid-season report. I based my vote on the previous budget, conflicts reported, and additions/subtraction of responsibilities of the CoC for Season 6.
-
Season 5 Feedback Thread
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: May 15, 2024, 9:08 a.m.
Content: Think this is good idea, and I support it wholeheartedly.
I also don’t agree with term limits.
But council renewal, gradually over time, is always considered an indicator of good corporate governance in the broader commercial world, and thus I believe Michael’s idea should be formalised across all Councils and elected bodies within the Collective.
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
No likes yet.
No replies yet.
-
Token House participation and incentives: Season 5 (Cycle 16-19)
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: March 23, 2024, 1:25 a.m.
Content: Wow! What a thorough review. Personally, it’s going to take a bit of time to get my head around everything here, but thanks for pulling this all together team. Cheers! EDIT: I just want to also note that I noticed that @gene wasn’t included in the members of the Code of Conduct listed above. When @teresacd became the CoCC Lead, then another new member slot became available, and thus Gene was added to the Code of Conduct Council as next nominee in the election. Just wanted to point this out for any readers here, or if any edits want to be made to the above report.
Likes: 7
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Token House participation and incentives: Season 5 (Cycle 16-19)
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: March 22, 2024, 9:25 p.m.
Content: Wow! What a thorough review.
Personally, it’s going to take a bit of time to get my head around everything here, but thanks for pulling this all together team. Cheers!
EDIT: I just want to also note that I noticed that @gene wasn’t included in the members of the Code of Conduct listed above. When @teresacd became the CoCC Lead, then another new member slot became available, and thus Gene was added to the Code of Conduct Council as next nominee in the election. Just wanted to point this out for any readers here, or if any edits want to be made to the above report.
Likes: 8
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: March 18, 2024, 7:52 p.m.
Content: Hi everyone,
This is Axel and I’m a member of the current season’s CoCC. I’m just posting now to prompt and encourage some feedback and ideally hear some points of view from others in the community. Please note: I’m posting here with my personal account, and thus I’m only posting on behalf of myself, and do not wish to imply the full endorsement from the CoCC for my own personal opinions described in this post.
In short:
In regards to doing a TEMP CHECK on any Proposal to Alter Token House Code of Conduct Council Charter for following Seasons, the CoCC has had some feedback from a platform outside of this Discourse Forum. The constructive criticism was that extending the deadline to resolve cases to a full season was probably too long, and may lead to reduced accountability for the CoCC if they didn’t need to wrap things up for several months and/or only needed to wrap things up once per season.
Personally, I believe this criticism is valid, but some sort of time expansion for handling cases would still required (just my opinion). I.e. A minimum of fours days (one voting cycle) to handle reports may be too short, but a maximum of five months (one season) to handle reports may also be too long.
So what does anyone else think?
How long do you think any future CoCC should have to receive, evaluate, decide and publish decisions for each report?
One voting cycle (i.e. keep as is)?
Two voting cycles (i.e. current and following)?
Three (i.e. current and next two following voting cycles)?
More (e.g. a full season or half season might be okay)?
If you want to chime in, then please do. There are no wrong answers. We are just trying to gauge community sentiment and encourage collective decision making.
Thanks for your time, cheers!
Likes: 1
Replies: 0
No replies yet.
-
Locate Delegated Tokens
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: March 5, 2024, 5:19 a.m.
Content: Hi there, I delegated to myself as an individual delegate, but from my understanding you should still have your OP in your wallet. I.e. Delegation doesn’t take the OP from your wallet, so if your wallet balance is 0 tokens then I fear they may have been lost or scammed. Happy for anyone with more experiencing of delegating to external parties to correct me here, if my understanding is wrong.
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
No likes yet.
No replies yet.
-
Locate Delegated Tokens
by Axel_T - No Role
Posted on: March 5, 2024, 12:19 a.m.
Content: Hi there,
I delegated to myself as an individual delegate, but from my understanding you should still have your OP in your wallet. I.e. Delegation doesn’t take the OP from your wallet, so if your wallet balance is 0 tokens then I fear they may have been lost or scammed.
Happy for anyone with more experiencing of delegating to external parties to correct me here, if my understanding is wrong.
Likes: 0
Replies: 0
No likes yet.
No replies yet.
