Hi all,
Due to the recent collapse of FTX it came to my attention that Amy Wu currently sits on the board of the ApeCoin DAO. While she officially resigned from FTX (see picture below).
Immagine 2022 - 11 - 14 150407733 × 727 358 KB
she currently sits on the ApeCoin DAO’s board, even though she removed all the info from her Twitter profile (See pic below).
(BEFORE)
Immagine 2022 - 11 - 14 1506481187 × 811 51 . 4 KB
(AFTER)
Immagine 2022 - 11 - 14 1507061517 × 862 371 KB
According to the “AIP- 1 Proposing the DAO Process” on the Guidelines paragraph 2 , it says:
“A board member may be removed and replaced prior to the term pursuant to a majority vote of token holders.”
What do you guys think? If we have enough votes and it makes sense to the majority of the community/DAO I would love to get in touch with @ 0 xSword to formally create and post an AIP to remove her effective immediately.
EDIT: We can’t for the time being :point_down:
On another topic
The governance process provides a 3 -month implementation period for an approved AIP before changes or amendments can be made. Please note that your proposal, Should we remove Amy Wu (FTX Ventures) from the board?, is in conflict with AIP- 113 : Extending AIP- 1 - the DAO Process.
Since AIP- 113 was approved and implemented on September 21 st, 2022 , your proposal shall be pending until December 21 st, 2022
You are welcome, however, to submit your idea as a general discussion topic, under the General category, to allow the community to discuss it in the meantime.
Thanks.
-Pearson
Thanks for reading,
Moonlyght
The post discusses Amy Wu's involvement in the ApeCoin DAO board and the process of potentially removing her. Despite interest in creating an AIP to remove her, due to governance rules, any proposal on this matter is on hold until December 21, 2022, as per AIP-113. The author encourages further discussion under the General category in the meantime.
Moonlyght: Hey 0xSword,
Yes creating an AIP to remove a Board member is something easy to do and can be done following what states AIP-1
Moonlyght:
According to the “AIP-1 Proposing the DAO Process” on the Guidelines paragraph 2, it says:
“A board member may be removed and replaced prior to the term pursuant to a majority vote of token holders.”
I hear speculation that you wanna defend your position and your $10k a month by not being removed from your future ApeComms position, but again, that’s nothing related to this post and when time will come to vote for that the community will decide.
Obviously there needs to be some reasoning to remove or replace somebody, we can’t just create a random AIP without foundation to remove somebody just because we feel like, BUT, if there’s some reasoning and good motivation behind, yes we as a DAO can create that kind of AIP.
Also, should we think about removing FTX as a place to buy/sell ApeCoin off the website? May want t…
Also, should we think about removing FTX as a place to buy/sell ApeCoin off the website? May want to remove for brand equity purposes.
Screen Shot 2022 - 11 - 15 at 08 . 10 . 252444 × 1508 504 KB
Lost: Hey @roosh & @Moonlyght ,
Glad to see the OP realized that we are mid elections, and also that the recently approved council process would conflict with this idea.
The idea to remove FTX from the website seems like something we can pursue without need of an AIP, by communicating with the admins. Great observation @roosh.
-Lost
Vulkan: Great observation about the exchanges @roosh. Should we also remove Voyager from the list? Paging @bc @Pearson @Escape
withoutname: Good point: every connection like that about FTX should be removed from the website.
In case of Amy Wu I don’t know her and don’t know exact connection with FTX or the another investment fund. As I got it, she stepped down from the FTX role - so the new election should solve the issue.
Hey @roosh & @Moonlyght ,
Glad to see the OP realized that we are mid elections, and also that the …
Hey @roosh & @Moonlyght ,
Glad to see the OP realized that we are mid elections, and also that the recently approved council process would conflict with this idea.
The idea to remove FTX from the website seems like something we can pursue without need of an AIP, by communicating with the admins. Great observation @roosh.
-Lost
:gorilla::orange_heart:
Great observation about the exchanges @roosh. Should we also remove Voyager from the list? Paging @…
Great observation about the exchanges @roosh. Should we also remove Voyager from the list? Paging @bc @Pearson @Escape
The short answer seems to be - yes @RedVulkan , imo, lets clear both of those up asap. If something…
The short answer seems to be - yes @RedVulkan , imo, lets clear both of those up asap. If something changes again later, we can make further adjustments. It seems SSP did forward this up the chain already, seems reasonable right now, but there may be some additional considerations since they were launch partners.
-Lost
:gorilla::orange_heart:
Love the responsiveness on this. We should certainly move to eliminate any connections to FTX, Voy…
Love the responsiveness on this. We should certainly move to eliminate any connections to FTX, Voyager, or any other questionable affiliations as soon as possible. Hope the admins can respond swiftly on this.
On another note, it IS unfortunate for Amy as it’s very likely she had nothing personally to do with any of FTX’s malfeasance, but “guilty by association” very much applies here and we really can’t have any of these connections moving forward as an organization.
Thanks for the input and glad that we all align on this delicate topic! @Lost @Vulkan @ssp 1111 @r…
Thanks for the input and glad that we all align on this delicate topic! @Lost @Vulkan @ssp 1111 @roosh @CryptoLogically
Since elections are so close, I think there’s a good chance that she wouldn’t run if her seat comes…
Since elections are so close, I think there’s a good chance that she wouldn’t run if her seat comes up for election. An AIP likely wouldn’t get through the process to remove her before that possible scenario. I do agree that she should no longer be on the board. Would it be worth waiting to submit an AIP until after we know who’s seats will be up for election and whether she would be running?
Mantis: I am 100% against this.
Anyone who knows crypto knows that #NYKNYC is the mantra, regardless of where the unwashed masses put their cashes. Nobody should be upset because FTX did what offshore CEXes with boards connected to shady dealers in government are made to do. If they would have found some way to continue the ponzi, no one would have any issue with the malfeasance. It’s hugely hypocritical to respond only now that the malfeasance has shown itself. It means you’ll happily accept bad actors as long as the bad doesn’t become too publicly known.
You all want a DAO that seeks out leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands instead of building off of the #codeislaw mantra, seeking true decentralization, and expanding opportunities to talented, deserving but unknown people? This is what you get! Lie in the bed you make.
Reducing an issue to a person and levying punishment on that person is absolutely the worst way to handle a situation like this.
Moonlyght: Yes, the soonest we can submit an AIP would be on December first, which by then I believe we’ll have an idea of who’s running for Special Council.
I am 100 % against this.
Anyone who knows crypto knows that #NYKNYC is the mantra, regardless of w…
I am 100 % against this.
Anyone who knows crypto knows that #NYKNYC is the mantra, regardless of where the unwashed masses put their cashes. Nobody should be upset because FTX did what offshore CEXes with boards connected to shady dealers in government are made to do. If they would have found some way to continue the ponzi, no one would have any issue with the malfeasance. It’s hugely hypocritical to respond only now that the malfeasance has shown itself. It means you’ll happily accept bad actors as long as the bad doesn’t become too publicly known.
You all want a DAO that seeks out leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands instead of building off of the #codeislaw mantra, seeking true decentralization, and expanding opportunities to talented, deserving but unknown people? This is what you get! Lie in the bed you make.
Reducing an issue to a person and levying punishment on that person is absolutely the worst way to handle a situation like this.
roosh: Like @CryptoLogically said, it is unfortunate for Amy to be mixed up with FTX. I think she should serve her term and the community should decide by vote if she should get re-elected or not. We shouldn’t judge a book by it’s cover. In terms of removing FTX from the site, it was just a comment/thought. I’m cool with whatever the admins decide.
adventurousape: You bring up some interesting points. But for me, if I had known what FTX was doing, I would want no part of it, them getting caught has nothing to do with it.
Mantis:
You all want a DAO that seeks out leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands instead of building off of the #codeislaw mantra, seeking true decentralization, and expanding opportunities to talented, deserving but unknown people? This is what you get! Lie in the bed you make.
I think you are generalizing here. Personally, leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands will not what I be looking for when I vote for the Special Council. While that may have it’s benefits, I think there are other qualities and skills that can be just as beneficial, if not more. I questioned in AIP-137 what was suggested as relevant experience
I feel bad for Amy. I doubt she knew what was going on and was probably blindsided just like everyone else. But now that the truth has come out about FTX, I think that the voters should have a chance to decide whether she stays or goes. The members of the DAO did not elect this Special Council in the first place. They were appointed.
I think since elections are so close, we should wait to see if she even wants to stay on the Special Council. I’d be very surprised if she does. But if on the off chance she does, and her seat is not up for elections this round, I feel an AIP would be appropriate so the community could decide what happens. Maybe they’ll vote to look past things and keep her. I don’t know. But I believe an important component of the DAO and decentralization is that the community is making the decisions.
Like @CryptoLogically said, it is unfortunate for Amy to be mixed up with FTX. I think she should s…
Like @CryptoLogically said, it is unfortunate for Amy to be mixed up with FTX. I think she should serve her term and the community should decide by vote if she should get re-elected or not. We shouldn’t judge a book by it’s cover. In terms of removing FTX from the site, it was just a comment/thought. I’m cool with whatever the admins decide.
You bring up some interesting points. But for me, if I had known what FTX was doing, I would want n…
You bring up some interesting points. But for me, if I had known what FTX was doing, I would want no part of it, them getting caught has nothing to do with it.
Mantis:
You all want a DAO that seeks out leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands instead of building off of the #codeislaw mantra, seeking true decentralization, and expanding opportunities to talented, deserving but unknown people? This is what you get! Lie in the bed you make.
I think you are generalizing here. Personally, leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands will not what I be looking for when I vote for the Special Council. While that may have it’s benefits, I think there are other qualities and skills that can be just as beneficial, if not more. I questioned in AIP- 137 what was suggested as relevant experience
image 872 × 641 69 . 4 KB
I feel bad for Amy. I doubt she knew what was going on and was probably blindsided just like everyone else. But now that the truth has come out about FTX, I think that the voters should have a chance to decide whether she stays or goes. The members of the DAO did not elect this Special Council in the first place. They were appointed.
I think since elections are so close, we should wait to see if she even wants to stay on the Special Council. I’d be very surprised if she does. But if on the off chance she does, and her seat is not up for elections this round, I feel an AIP would be appropriate so the community could decide what happens. Maybe they’ll vote to look past things and keep her. I don’t know. But I believe an important component of the DAO and decentralization is that the community is making the decisions.
Mantis: I’m ecstatic that someone else is taking this seriously, and I appreciate all of your points, @adventurousape. Here’s the one thing we did know (at least we defi maxis) — FTX was in some shady sh!! before they tanked, because we knew they were doing the same thing as Celsius and Voyager.
There will be others, because they’ve been caught sharing ETH with each other to meet reserve requirements and other such tomfoolery.
The fix here is a change in values, because other Special Council members may very well have associations with CEXes or government orgs that just haven’t been caught yet. What then? Do they get to stay just because their ponzi held out a few weeks longer, or because their associations haven’t been proven beyond shadow of doubt by a Supreme Court ruling?
I’ll be looking for other Special Council candidates to weigh in.
Vulkan: Great post @adventurousape. I agree with most if not all the points you laid out.
I think you are generalizing here. Personally, leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands will not what I be looking for when I vote for the Special Council. While that may have it’s benefits, I think there are other qualities and skills that can be just as beneficial, if not more. I questioned in AIP-137 what was suggested as relevant experience
There are actually a good amount of people in the DAO that feel the same way, including myself. The community didn’t get to provide any input on who was selected as the first five Special Council members (they were selected for us to start) so although they each have name-brand corporate experience that’s not necessarily what the DAO values. Sure some do, but some don’t. That’s not what I will be personally looking for when I’m voting for Special Council.
To @Mantis’s point here:
You all want a DAO that seeks out leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands instead of building off of the #codeislaw mantra, seeking true decentralization, and expanding opportunities to talented, deserving but unknown people?
I actually think there are many opportunities to make things in this DAO more decentralized, such as the voting and proposal processes. I’m not sure how this is accomplished yet, but they are things I think about a lot.
As far as Amy goes, I also feel bad for her. I don’t know the details of what happened, but it’s very possible she didn’t know what was going on. Even though this might be the case, I still think this is a type of “significant event” where the DAO should get to decide next steps.
I do think it would be best to first find out more information on which Special Council members’ seats are up for re-election before we make that decision though.
I’m ecstatic that someone else is taking this seriously, and I appreciate all of your points, @adve…
I’m ecstatic that someone else is taking this seriously, and I appreciate all of your points, @adventurousape. Here’s the one thing we did know (at least we defi maxis) — FTX was in some shady sh!! before they tanked, because we knew they were doing the same thing as Celsius and Voyager.
There will be others, because they’ve been caught sharing ETH with each other to meet reserve requirements and other such tomfoolery.
The fix here is a change in values, because other Special Council members may very well have associations with CEXes or government orgs that just haven’t been caught yet. What then? Do they get to stay just because their ponzi held out a few weeks longer, or because their associations haven’t been proven beyond shadow of doubt by a Supreme Court ruling?
I’ll be looking for other Special Council candidates to weigh in.
Great post @adventurousape. I agree with most if not all the points you laid out.
I think you are …
Great post @adventurousape. I agree with most if not all the points you laid out.
I think you are generalizing here. Personally, leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands will not what I be looking for when I vote for the Special Council. While that may have it’s benefits, I think there are other qualities and skills that can be just as beneficial, if not more. I questioned in AIP- 137 what was suggested as relevant experience
There are actually a good amount of people in the DAO that feel the same way, including myself. The community didn’t get to provide any input on who was selected as the first five Special Council members (they were selected for us to start) so although they each have name-brand corporate experience that’s not necessarily what the DAO values. Sure some do, but some don’t. That’s not what I will be personally looking for when I’m voting for Special Council.
To @Mantis’s point here:
You all want a DAO that seeks out leadership based on name brand corporate experience and association with popular brands instead of building off of the #codeislaw mantra, seeking true decentralization, and expanding opportunities to talented, deserving but unknown people?
I actually think there are many opportunities to make things in this DAO more decentralized, such as the voting and proposal processes. I’m not sure how this is accomplished yet, but they are things I think about a lot.
As far as Amy goes, I also feel bad for her. I don’t know the details of what happened, but it’s very possible she didn’t know what was going on. Even though this might be the case, I still think this is a type of “significant event” where the DAO should get to decide next steps.
I do think it would be best to first find out more information on which Special Council members’ seats are up for re-election before we make that decision though.
Mantis: I also feel bad for her. I don’t know the details of what happened, but it’s very possible she didn’t know what was going on.
I’m glad that I made statements that I knew would be a bit over-the-top, because they were meant to call out statements like this one. I’ve seen multiple people now state, with no evidence whatsoever, that “I feel bad for Amy.” “She probably didn’t know what was going on.” My point? All of us make unfounded assumptions instead of working from values.
I assumed you all were steeped in corporate starlight, and you take it badly because that’s a negative reflection on you. Yet many people “feel bad for Amy” just assuming she had nothing to do with it, even though there is no evidence either way. She could have been smoking bongs clicking “buy” on PoopooCoin watching Naruto in a Bahama jacuzzi right next to Charlotte. You don’t know. Seems like corporate starlight to me.
If I’m wrong, take emotion out of this and function according to values. What are the values of the DAO in this case? Not knee jerk reactions to cut Amy just because of FTX OR assume Amy is innocent just because of who-knows-why. What are the DAO’s values?
And @adventurousape, do the people who think like you and me have enough votes to matter? From what I’ve seen in Snapshot, the people who decide every vote don’t do Discourse at all. They just show up and swing the Mighty Paw of Ape on datass during the vote.
CryptoLogically: To your last sentence, Maaria herself admitted that she will be stepping down on Monday’s ApeComms Twitter Space, so that’s one seat we know for certain. We might presume Amy would be a second, but I don’t think we can know that for a fact just yet.
I also feel bad for her. I don’t know the details of what happened, but it’s very possible she did…
I also feel bad for her. I don’t know the details of what happened, but it’s very possible she didn’t know what was going on.
I’m glad that I made statements that I knew would be a bit over-the-top, because they were meant to call out statements like this one. I’ve seen multiple people now state, with no evidence whatsoever, that “I feel bad for Amy.” “She probably didn’t know what was going on.” My point? All of us make unfounded assumptions instead of working from values.
I assumed you all were steeped in corporate starlight, and you take it badly because that’s a negative reflection on you. Yet many people “feel bad for Amy” just assuming she had nothing to do with it, even though there is no evidence either way. She could have been smoking bongs clicking “buy” on PoopooCoin watching Naruto in a Bahama jacuzzi right next to Charlotte. You don’t know. Seems like corporate starlight to me.
If I’m wrong, take emotion out of this and function according to values. What are the values of the DAO in this case? Not knee jerk reactions to cut Amy just because of FTX OR assume Amy is innocent just because of who-knows-why. What are the DAO’s values?
And @adventurousape, do the people who think like you and me have enough votes to matter? From what I’ve seen in Snapshot, the people who decide every vote don’t do Discourse at all. They just show up and swing the Mighty Paw of Ape on datass during the vote.
I’ve actually seen a lot of things saying that the people outside of Sam’s inner circle didn’t know…
I’ve actually seen a lot of things saying that the people outside of Sam’s inner circle didn’t know what was going on. Do I know 100 % that this is true and that she wasn’t involved? Nope, but I’ll give her and others the benefit of the doubt unless I see evidence otherwise.
Mantis:
What are the DAO’s values?
image 868 × 395 84 KB
Mantis:
do the people who think like you and me have enough votes to matter?
I really have no idea how people will vote on different things. I doubt you and I vote the same on everything. And maybe some of the whales aren’t active on discourse, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t paying attention. This is why it’s important to have different viewpoints communicated across mediums. Especially Twitter since that’s where a lot of people get their information. ApeComms hosts a Community Hour spaces every Friday at 12 PM PST. I think it would be great place for you to share your viewpoint on this outside of Discourse and Discord.
From a technical standpoint, I think that it would be difficult to write an AIP like this. My prima…
From a technical standpoint, I think that it would be difficult to write an AIP like this. My primary reasoning for that belief is that I view the Special Council as a “Working Group” of the DAO. There has been considerable debate on the subject, including line-by-line interpretations, as to whether the Ape Foundation & Special Council are separate entities. My own interpretation is that they are separate.
389 f 0 ef 56 ec 5 c 4 ba 864 c 18 c 4 d 2 a 33 a 4 db 1 a 82 fc 5 _ 2 _ 1035 x 5911035 × 591 32 . 2 KB
Assuming that status, then as a separate entity, they have significantly more autonomy, and though token holders will be voting to elect new members to serve, there is likely no easy way to remove them. I do not believe “AIP:REMOVE __ from Special Council” will work, just the same as “AIP: REMOVE SWORD from ApeComms,” likely would not be a valid AIP proposal.
Token Holders do not have the ability to dictate the processes of Working Groups. Not easily. When a group is introduced, they outline the processes, then define the relationship w/ both the token holders & the Ape Foundation. An AIP cannot (easily) be written tomorrow that says: “Each ApeComms member will wake up @ 6 am, drink Ape Water, and send Mantis a good morning message.”
While that may be a funny example, the responsibility of managing a members Ape Water consumption is entirely regulated within the Working Group. If the community feels that Sword is not drinking enough Ape Water, the Working Group must make efforts correct the problem, or even decide internally to remove him. It is unlikely that a token holder vote to remove him would be anything more than symbolic.
Moonlyght: Hey 0xSword,
Yes creating an AIP to remove a Board member is something easy to do and can be done following what states AIP-1
Moonlyght:
According to the “AIP-1 Proposing the DAO Process” on the Guidelines paragraph 2, it says:
“A board member may be removed and replaced prior to the term pursuant to a majority vote of token holders.”
I hear speculation that you wanna defend your position and your $10k a month by not being removed from your future ApeComms position, but again, that’s nothing related to this post and when time will come to vote for that the community will decide.
Obviously there needs to be some reasoning to remove or replace somebody, we can’t just create a random AIP without foundation to remove somebody just because we feel like, BUT, if there’s some reasoning and good motivation behind, yes we as a DAO can create that kind of AIP.
Good point: every connection like that about FTX should be removed from the website.
In case of Amy…
Good point: every connection like that about FTX should be removed from the website.
In case of Amy Wu I don’t know her and don’t know exact connection with FTX or the another investment fund. As I got it, she stepped down from the FTX role - so the new election should solve the issue.
To your last sentence, Maaria herself admitted that she will be stepping down on Monday’s ApeComms …
To your last sentence, Maaria herself admitted that she will be stepping down on Monday’s ApeComms Twitter Space, so that’s one seat we know for certain. We might presume Amy would be a second, but I don’t think we can know that for a fact just yet.
Yes, the soonest we can submit an AIP would be on December first, which by then I believe we’ll hav…
Yes, the soonest we can submit an AIP would be on December first, which by then I believe we’ll have an idea of who’s running for Special Council.
