[Proposal] - Amendments to the Steward Council

Proposal: Amendments to the Steward Council

Preface:

This document seeks to amend (not replace) Proposal: V2 of the Steward Council which was passed on Snapshot on December 05, 2022.

For simplicity, this document will capture “amendments” which will update components of the Proposal: V2 of the Steward Council. For transparency this document will list the relevant “Original wording” and ”Amended wording” segments of the proposal as well as “rational” for the change.

There are three amendments this document attempts to capture:

Amendment #1: Removing the specificity of the team composition
This is mostly a non material clean up item. This change allows Gitcoin to adjust the number of works streams without adjusting the Steward Council election document.

Amendment #2 Changing meeting type and frequency
This change builds on lessons learned that smaller, more targeted time with the external stewards delivered greater value to the Gitcoin workstream leaders. This change reduces “context” time for the external partners and increases targeted time with specific topics relevant to the Gitcoin Workstream leaders.

Amendment #3 Adjustments to the election process
This change eliminates the reference to the voting tool and changes the voting mechanism from an egalitarian vote (all voters are weighted equally) to a token weighted vote (more tokens = greater influence). This change also opens voting up to all GTC token holders (who are eligible to vote) vs. the previous approach which whitelisted participation to Gitcoin Stewards.

The changes in detail:

Amendment #1: Removing the specificity of the team composition

Original wording:
To facilitate a move to an externally-aware advisory body, this proposal changes the team composition to 6 Gitcoin core team delegates and 10 external stewards.

Amended wording:
To facilitate a move to an externally-aware advisory body, this proposal changes the team composition to one Gitcoin core team delegate from each workstream and external stewards.

Rational:
This change would allow Gitcoin to add or remove workstreams without needing to adjust the Steward Council election process.

Amendment #2 Changing meeting type and frequency

Original wording:

Amended wording:

Rational:
Based on the prior season, both workstream leaders and external council members found the 2x’s general reviews did not lead to rich and insightful conversions. They were helpful for maintaining context for the external steward council members - especially when accompanied by pre-reading, but the frequency was too often and added little value to the Gitcoin representatives. Conversely, ad-hoc meetings with specific topics held with a targeted audience of domain experts resulted in better discussion and insight. Based on this information, we propose reducing the general sessions to make room for specific topic reviews as needed by the workstreams.

Amendment #3 Adjustments to the election process

Original wording:
Step 3: Steward elections:
The fifteen nominees (5 workstreams x 3 candidates) will be entered into a quadratic voting pool for a steward vote using https://quadraticvote.co/ 1 tool. Existing stewards will vote on nominees using the nominee linked bios found here 2. Each steward will receive 10 “votes”, which can be used to vote for up to 10 candidates using the standard quadratic voting methodology. Individual voting links will be distributed via email to voters, and it is the responsibility of the voter to pass along their preferred email address.

The top 10 of this ranking will be invited to join the Steward council, and the outcome of this Quadratic vote will be considered final. There will be no additional snapshot or Tally vote to ratify the selection of the 10 + 6 steward council members.

Amended wording:
Step 3: Steward elections:
The nominees will be elected via a token weighted quadratic vote. Existing token holders will vote on nominees using the nominee linked bios found here 2.

The top 2/3rds of this ranking will be invited to join the Steward Council, and the outcome of this Quadratic vote will be considered final. There will be no additional snapshot or Tally vote to ratify the selection of the steward council members.

Rational:
In late 2022 we didn’t have a method to safely execute a token weighted quadratic vote. Today we feel confident that we can execute a sybil resistant token weighted vote using Snapshot, the quadratic voting strategy and Passport. Note, we originally had 15 external nominees, and the top 10 were placed on the council. We change the specification to “2/3rds” so that the number of winners can adjust with the number of workstreams and nominees (2 nominees per workstream).

9 Likes

This is (mostly) the proposal as I originally solicited input on, but there is a good chance that to save time, I will turn this into a GCF to secure funding for the Steward Council within the same proposal. The risk is, the community does not like the proposed changes and votes down the proposal and funding goes with it. But, if the community does not support funding the work, the proposed changes matter a bit less. So, we save a step, but I am open to input.

3 Likes

Thanks for being, detailed about shifting this language. This proposal has my support.

Thanks @shawn16400

These changes seem safe enough in my opinion. I’d also appreciate the opportunity to participate in the monthly stewards call if I were given access :innocent:

2 Likes

Just want to mention that I love these change as they hopefully bring more intentional interactions to the CSDO and Steward Council members. Thanks for proposing!

3 Likes

Thank you Shawn,
all the amendments are valid and valuable, thank you very much for your proposal!

1 Like

Very much appreciate the detail here @shawn16400. I’m supportive of these changes!

2 Likes

Thank you @shawn16400 – this is as discussed on the recent call, and I’m happy to support these changes.

3 Likes

Thanks for all your awesome work on governing our governance, as always @shawn16400 -

I do want to highlight what jengajojo offers here on involvement in the monthly calls - and also just raise the discussion of how we can create new + tangible ways for existing and prospective stewards to get involved in increasing levels of seriousness.

I know you’ve been thinking about all these types of things- so would love a sneak peek if it feels tangible to discuss what the future of stewardship might look like? A few conversations I’ve had lately center our opportunity to utilize steward expertise and have “advisory” roles that could supplement the way CSDO works in current-state.

Looking forward to all the things - and thank you again for your work and thank you to our avid community members looking for ways to get involved :two_hearts: :hammer_and_wrench: :hammer_and_wrench:

5 Likes

All -
Thank you for the comments and the input. I have moved this to the “proposals” channel, removed the open questions from the document and posted the proposal to snapshot for a vote.

https://snapshot.org/#/gitcoindao.eth/proposal/0x3197b27c0f667ced874f3fa0ad9e5bdd00e7bd4222a4c19a6692c7e3e9b0c42e
the vote closes on June 07 at ~4am EST.

Should this proposal pass, we will create a clean version of these two parts (the original and the amendment) for readability sake, but will reference both in the document for historical reference.

2 Likes

upvoting this! Thank you for articulating so well.

1 Like

Thanks Shawn for the thoughtful suggestions. And @ale.k agreeing with you on some informal advisor role, pending on the alignment of strategic goals of of Gitcoin inclusive of both product and BD partnerships.

2 Likes

fyi - this snapshot vote has passed with ~99% approval rate.
Metrics:
1638 unique votes
~8.4M GTC tokens cast.

Thank you to all the voters for participating in our governance and we will post the election process shortly.

https://snapshot.org/#/gitcoindao.eth/proposal/0x3197b27c0f667ced874f3fa0ad9e5bdd00e7bd4222a4c19a6692c7e3e9b0c42e