DAOVOZ Report & Retroactive Funding Temp Check

Grants/Funding
1

Project Champion: senad.eth
Squad: senad.eth
Purpose: public good
Affiliation: BanklessDAO, CV Labs, FTWDAO
Authors; Editors: senad.eth
Date created: Jan 23rd, 2023
Date posted: Feb 1st, 2023
Funds requested: The final amount shall be determined based of a weighted average of the poll below (FYI: travel expenses were around €350,- which equals 50k BANK)
Project wallet: 0xAf5c595eaA0ED462A75157513D99e1E3B0D1A570

PROJECT TEASER

This is to determine and request retroactive funding from the GC for attending DAOVOZ 2023, a DAO Forum & Networking Lounge organised yearly by VC Labs in Davos Switzerland, on behalf of BanklessDAO. I was invited to join a panel and speak on the topic of DAO Governance: Learnings for the next waves of DAOs.

SUMMARY

Project Description

“The DAO Forum collective is a DAO of DAOs, on a mission to bring positive change to society and our environment by surfacing and amplifying the most suitable and impactful voices and ideas in the web3 space.”

1000×500 67.4 KB

:point_down:Me, very excited, trying to point at DAOVOZ on the respective board, but kind of failed doing so? :face_exhaling:

960×1280 151 KB

:point_down:Panel: DAO-Governance: Learnings for the next waves of DAOs.

1280×960 100 KB

:point_down:Speakers:

  • Senad: BanklessDAO
  • Tadeo: MakerDAO
  • Jose Ramirez Encinas: Palmera
  • Anna-Grace Kleczewski: Bonnard Lawson
  • Victoria Soelle: FTWDAO

828×621 72.1 KB

:point_down:Next Up: Networking

768×1024 89.4 KB

:point_down:I managed to connect with a bunch of folks, from various web3 niches.

Orgs Contact
UsInWeb3 (LiamDAO) Sven Hermann, Sander Andersen
FTWDAO Isla Munro-Hochmayr, Victoria Citterio-Soelle, Hana Kanjaa
MakerDAO Tadeo - no LinkedIn (>_<)
Crypto Commons Association Felix Fritsch
The Way of the DAO Charloette Lynne Melkun
NxGen (Ex-Celsius) Leah Jones
NoBank Labs Mario Leoni

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Project Breakdown

The final ask shall be a weighted average of the poll below

Compensation Breakdown

Organisers do not ask for any BANK

KPI

None, since a 1-time request :slight_smile:

COMMITMENTS

My attendance and the panel has promoted the bankless mission and vision as well as nudge folks to join the DAO and contribute towards its mission!

BRANDING

Use of BanklessDAO name

FURTHER PROJECT CHANNELS

Final Thoughts

I want to give Isla (liza_ch, L2 contributor) a major shoutout who made this possible by inviting me to stay with her family in Zuerich. Special thanks to Hana from FTWDAO, as travelling to Davos with her made the ride at least 2x more fun. And, of course, many thanks to fellow contributor @links who introduced me to this opportunity. :black_flag:

I was not sure whether to create this post or not. Putting together this report took me way longer than expected. However, I’d like to find out what our community thinks about this type of retroactive funding request. Wouldn’t it be cool if we motivated contributors to attend conferences as bankless members and report back to us if they wish to do so and what they get in exchange is governance rights? I’m sure we have digital nomads, who are planning to attend crypto- & blockchain events this year. :face_with_peeking_eye:

POLL: How much retro funding should Senad be granted? The final ask shall be a weighted average of the poll result

  • 0 BANK
  • 20k BANK
  • 40k BANK
  • 60k BANK
  • 80k BANK

0 voters

2 Likes
2

This poll stands on its own merit and I do not support continued retroactive funding requests as a system/process approved by the entire needs to be established, approved, implemented and approved. Having said that, I appreciate his initiative and participation and fine representation of our community and think a level of reimbursement plus reward is warranted. I think the system was not in place or was not responsive to the opportunity presented. He is a champion and utilized his resources well.

2 Likes
3

Really? Unless all the votes are for zero BANK you’re guaranteeing yourself funding?

Wow, what a post :roll_eyes:

2 Likes
4

hey @DoubleB! Thanks for your comment. :slight_smile:

If 100% of our community feel I don’t deserve being retrofunded (= they chose 0 BANK), then I’m not challenge this and 0 BANK it will be!

Let’s assume you choose 0 BANK. Do you think 57%, who believe I deserve at least 40k BANK, are wrong or deserve to influence the final ask less than the ones who chose 0 BANK? :thinking:

Allowing the community to directly influence the final amount that shall be requested from the GC is what I intended to attempt here. Perhaps I missed the purpose or am ignorant of something. I figured that the best way for me to do that is using a weighted average poll. Do you have a better idea? Happy to learn and improve! :dizzy:

Furthermore, the funding is of course not guaranteed for me, as the GC has to weigh in and give their opinions to a mid-season funding request. They will also ask me how I concluded the funding amount and, in this particular case, I felt more comfortable referring to community sentiment.

5

Learning wise this is a good post. As, if this is the first time a form of retroactive payment for such a request is paid out, we will see how bDAO members vote for [insert any reason] retroactively.

If a precedent is being set, this possibly opens up a whole can of worms in that if funding is approved, I can see others pointing directly to this post as their reason for requesting their own retro funding.

A clear majority is currently in favour of funding at some amount of BANK. Although I believe if the funding had been requested in advance of the event the vote would’ve been overwhelmingly in favour of providing funding.

I likely wouldn’t have questioned this had there been some form of a larger bDAO presence beyond the small print of “Bankless DAO” below your name on the video screen, as well if the request had been a two vote post with the first being a yes/no on the asking for funding with a follow vote on how much BANK, with no more than three numerical options.

Again, unless the precedent has already been set, this is an interesting experiment in that it may open up a whole other can of worms with others not just asking for funding, but expecting funding for their own past bDAO initiatives.

Further, full props if this is an original ask, big coconuts fren :+1:t2:

4 Likes
6

Isla here, founder of FTW DAO and long-time Bankless / Fight Club contributor, I fully support this proposal.

We would normally have done a proposal earlier on but the opportunity to run the event at all came up two weeks before it happened, and I was only put in touch with Senad a couple of days before the event. There was no time to wait for a DAO proposal in order for him to make a decision on whether on not to represent the DAO. In this case a retroactive request was the only option.

Senad did an awesome job of representing Bankless DAO to an audience of over 100 people from around the world. He talked about Bankless DAO during the panel and his participation was definitely a net benefit impact for Bankless DAO in presence at a highly reputable event, and for his ability to do more for Bankless DAO via his new contacts and network in the European web3 ecosystem.

Bankless’ logo was included on our event banners even though we only had confirmation of attendance two days before the event so it was more than just a logo on a slide. But much more important and high impact was Senad being a speaker alongside some really top names in the space, and meeting and connecting with these people.

2 Likes
7

If this is just a temperature check on an amount and you will follow up with a traditional funding request, where the options are Fund or Not, then that makes sense.

Otherwise majority rules; it’s how we’ve run everything. Currently, the majority selected 0 BANK.

I highly encourage you treat it as the former: get your weighted average from this poll and follow up with a traditional Yes/No. Otherwise it feels like manipulating the rules and sets a bad precedent for every other funding proposal to do the same.

5 Likes
8

This hits my sentiment on this, and isolated weighted average voting.

There are technically two votes here, and weighted average voting alone cooks in the assumption that the DAO has approved funding something, and moves straight to ‘how much should this be compensated?’

When both votes are present, the weighted average informs and supports the approval vote.

Additionally weighted average voting alone, while a positive scenario here, could be exploited in other scenarios, for example asking for ETH, USDC or other.

As a result, I don’t think we should support isolated weighted average voting proposals.

All that said, I do appreciate your representation at DAOVOZ and what you did there :slight_smile:, and think you should be compensated for your support of the DAO.
:+1:

3 Likes
9

Thank you @DoubleB,@Liza,@jameswmontgomery.eth & @Icedcool for weighting in!

I agree with both @jameswmontgomery.eth and @Icedcool as you bring up valid & good points. This proposal shall be a temp check to determine the ask based off a weighted average. If the respective ask passes or not shall be determined in a follow-up post with yes / no (/abstain) options :+1:

3 Likes
10

Thank you for reconsidering your ask, I hope that this hiccup does not deter you from promoting bDAO going forward.

2 Likes
11

Being one of the newer members and not fully understanding the process this gets me excited and also distraught. Due to the semantics of it.

   My careers in restaurant management and now having a painting business i many times found myself spending weekend’s, vacation and family time being interrupted. I believe guidelines are needed and when I think of retroactive funding. I see it as recommendation from others.

   I believe the true nature of retroactive funding should be a selfless act with no expectations. For the good of all. Maybe this should be labeled as reimbursement we need a petty cash fund so we don’t let opportunities like this pass us by in the future and we have a way Loosely to cover expenses.
   
   Please understand I’m not completely informed on this topic. Some of what I have said may not apply to this situation nor taken as negative. We should be able to seize opportunities opportunities in moment at all times and Be compensated or rewarded. 
     
    Im just a big supporter for Retroactive Funding. People should get paid for there passions. I felt it was important to not dilute the purpose. Important to me to talk on that topic. We need to all do better, I’m determined for my kids to have options. 

      Apologies to all for the rant. Fully understand it’s off topic in little way do I believe this is the end goal of Retroactive Funding. And if I have spoke out of place let me know and I’ll keep my babbling in general or GM I’m still getting a handle where everything goes have a great weekend 
                                        P.s.  
        I’ll get some pics atop table rock of The rouge valley The Great Northwest second to none when it comes to hiking, scenery and outdoors.

                        TRU out
12

Hey @Truoregonian, you hit on a very good point in your post re: petty cash.

There are unique situations that will arise, some of them may in fact be deserving of retro funding. The request and the amount will almost always be scrutinized however. As a DAO, how do we handle these situations is the question.

Thanks again for the suggestion :+1:t2:

1 Like