Appreciate the direction and the thoughtful research this working group is doing.
Seems like there’s some guidelines brewing of different models of comp (and hopefully their strengths and weaknesses learned so far from our existing experiments with them). Really like that it’s a guide only and sounds like it still allows for localized experimentation. Really appreciate particularly the closing paragraph that considers that if there’s tons of latitude and self-organization relative to comp across the DAO then there’s likely the occasional dispute due to lack of rigid standards.
I will vote in favour of guides/experiments and latitude; so I’m also in favour of an expectation of dispute and a formal method of resolving defined. I don’t think this is isolated to comp though. I think there’s need for an evolution of the ombuds into a proper DAO-wide dispute resolution framework. In the spirit of Ostrom’s Principals #5,6,7 for a Commons (https://www.onthecommons.org/magazine/elinor-ostroms-8-principles-managing-commmons) we need a clear and accessible path to dispute resolution and graduated escalation of sanctions for violation of agreed to norms – outside of that freedom and experimentation should reign imo.