Media Nodes Model for Applications/Leads, Verification, Benefits, and Accountability

Archive
1

Title: Media Node Onboarding Model
Read the proposal: Media Nodes Protocol - Google Docs
Authors: wolfehr#3150
Co-authors: MrPackman#4019, Fabian Klauder#9773
Date: 5/6/2021

SUMMARY

  • This is a proposal for how the Bankless DAO can interact with media nodes. It includes
    • A method for submitting applications and leads
    • A verification process
    • Benefits the DAO provides the media node
    • Benefits the media node provides the DAO
    • A mechanism to hold media nodes accountable to being good citizens in the bankless movement

BACKGROUND

  • Those media nodes will help spread the bankless message by
    • Providing unique perspectives and expertise
    • Tapping into new audience
    • Helping the bankless movement gain credibility by adding new logos
    • Increasing the value of BANK via staking
  • Bankless DAO will help media nodes
    • Provide yield on staked BANK
    • Promoting the media node via the bankless.community website
    • Promoting the media node and media node content via substack, newsletters, etc.
    • Promotion within the Bankless DAO

MOTIVATION

  • At a societal level very few people are familiar with the bankless movement and how blockchain technology and ethereum can change society.
  • Growing the bankless movement will require onboarding media nodes into the bankless ecosystem to help spread the message to people that aren’t already aware of the movement and looking for ways to learn more and participate.
  • Also, Ryan Sean Adam’s asked for a model to be developed to onboard new media nodes.

SPECIFICATION

Media Node Applies or a Bankless DAO member submits a lead

  • Media nodes submit an application
  • The application is added to the database of media nodes requiring verification
  • A Champion is assigned to the media node with the responsibility of validating and facilitating onboarding the media node.
    • Verification includes
      • Is the node a legitimate media source?
      • Is the node trustworthy?
      • Does the media nodes values align with those of the bankless movement?
      • Does the node produce content that would further the bankless movement?
      • Is there a free way to view the node’s content?
        • The Bankless DAO should not be used by nodes as a way to drive traffic to a paid service. It’s okay if there’s an ancillary paid service, as long as there is relevant free content available as well. For example, Bankless LLC has a premium service, but there is also value available for free.
      • Does the media node have a sufficient audience?
        • The target is TBD monthly reach

If the media node fails verification

  • The Champion updates the media node status to Rejected in the application tracker.
  • The Champion will inform the applicant (directly submitted) or Discoverer (if lead from a DAO member) the application was not accepted along with the reason why.
  • The process ends here.

If the media node passes verification

  • The Champion updates the media node status to Verified in the application tracker.
  • The Champion informs the media node they’ve been verified and onboarding will start once TBD BANK has been staked on bankless.community

Once the media node has staked TBD BANK

  • The Champion updates the media node status to Onboarding In Progres in the application tracker.
  • The bankless.community team adds the media node to the “Media Nodes” section of the bankless.community website
  • Substack Writers and Research Analysts begin to include the media node in their writing and research (as it makes sense).
  • The Champion updates the media node status to Onboarding Complete in the application tracker.

If the media node stake drops below TBD BANK

  • The Champion updates the media node status to Removed in the application tracker.
  • The Champion informs the Media Node they are being removed from the network until they have TBD BANK staked again.
  • The bankless.community team removes the media node to the “Media Nodes” section of the bankless.community website
  • Substack Writers and Research Analysts stop including the media node in their writing and research (as it makes sense).

If the media note violates the terms and conditions

  • A Bankless DAO member raises concerns and provides example(s) of the bad behavior.
  • The DAO votes on if the violation should result in slashing. A quorum of TBD percent of BANK must vote and at least TBD percent must vote in favor for the slashing to take place. If the DAO votes to slash…
  • The Champion informs the media node they’ve been slashed and why they’ve been slashed.
  • 25% of the media nodes stake is transferred to the DAO treasury.
  • If this drops the media node below the required staking amount, they would go into the “If the media node stake drops below TBD BANK” flow

NEXT STEPS

  • Define a process for assigning a Champion to pending applications
  • Add a section to the bankless.community website to share media nodes
  • Develop a method for media nodes to stake BANK and funding from the DAO treasury to pay yield.
  • Develop a method to punish bad behavior of media nodes via slashing
  • Confirm the verification criteria and terms & conditions (which might be the same thing)
  • Determine how to make paying yield on staked BANK sustainable long term

CONCLUSION

  • The proposal defines a process for collecting, verifying and onboarding new media nodes, benefits for the media node, and benefit for the DAO. It also describes a mechanism (staking and slashing) to hold media nodes accountable for living the bankless values.
  • Adding media nodes to the bankless ecosystem will be critical for growing the bankless movement and reaching a diverse audience.
  • Also, Ryan Sean Adam said we should do this :slight_smile:

POLL

  • For
    • Method for media nodes to apply to DAO members to submit leads
    • Provides a method of verifying media nodes are a good fit for the bankless ecosystem
    • Creates value for the media node and the DAO
    • Requires the media node to have skin in the game via staking
    • Provides a way for the DAO to hold media nodes accountable for bad behavior.
  • Against
    • Requires manual work to onboard and verify new media nodes
    • Requires funding from the treasury to pay yield on staked BANK
    • There’s no solution for validating reach
    • May require a DAO vote for certain activities (e.g., verification or slashing)
  • For
  • Against

0 voters

AUTHOR BACKGROUND

wolfehr#3150

  • I am a Release Manager at a multi-billion dollar CRM company. I have experience designing processes, holding people and teams accountable that I have no authority over, and managing complex projects and initiatives with many stakeholders and different opinions.
  • I am creating this proposal because it seems like a critical need for the DAO and I’d like to contribute where I can and start to build my credentials in the bankless community.

Fabian Klauder#9773

  • I’m the co-founder of a popular DeFi education platform featuring a podcast, newsletter, and more.
  • We are considering joining the BanklessDAO as a media node. So I helped to create this proposal from the perspective of a media node representative.

MrPackman#4019

  • Professionally I am a product owner and have experience in organizing and driving teams towards the desired goal. Typically handle multiple projects and teams at a time with a focus on e-commerce and customer portals.
  • Turns out I am very new to the crypto space yet here I am because I want to learn and create change towards a positive impact. Helping in a small way with this proposal is just one small step towards that goal.
5 Likes
2

This is brilliant. I have a few suggestions and a discussion topic:

  • Application should have a field for media reach, which the Champion will verify later.
  • Champion members are chosen based on nominations and voted upon
  • Nodes should stake the minimum amount required to be a voting member. Right now, membership requires 35K $BANK to be a member and vote. There is talk of decoupling the bar for entry and bar for voters rights. Eg. If membership is 1K $BANK and voting rights is 35K $BANK, staking is 35K.
  • Media nodes driving to paid services must pay a recurring fee
  • Champions should be compensated for each formal verification. Perhaps we assign a standard price to each applicant and let champions choose their preference. Champions shouldn’t have more than 5 obligations at one time.

Discussion topic
We need a discovery process for how media nodes interact with the DAO and what type of mutually beneficial relationship we can build. I propose announce our intentions to media outlets and start an open discussion on how to best cooperate. We can pen some more formal rules later. Right now, I think the structure provided in this proposal is good.

3 Likes
3

On the application form I would suggest putting a place for contact info
Asking who the contact person is cool, but getting contact info is key.
I wouldn’t trust people to just fill it out without a prompt - too much hunting down

4

Application should have a field for media reach, which the Champion will verify later.

MrPackman, Fabian, and I were chatting about the same thing in the doc. I’m going to add it to the application.

There are still some open questions on the topic.

  • How to verify the media reach stated in the application?
  • How important it is to get an accurate number?
  • What happens if their reach changes?
  • Is it something we’d want them to update periodically?

Champion members are chosen based on nominations and voted upon

Good idea! I think we’re adapting the proposal to have a committee instead of one individual person. It allows diverse perspectives to be taken into account, it enables the committee to spread out the workload, and it prevents a single point of failure (i.e., the Champion gets sick or goes on vacation). I think the idea of nominating and voting Champions is still valid regardless of it’s a person or committee of persons.

Nodes should stake the minimum amount required to be a voting member. Right now, membership requires 35K $BANK to be a member and vote. There is talk of decoupling the bar for entry and bar for voters rights. Eg. If membership is 1K $BANK and voting rights is 35K $BANK, staking is 35K.

Great idea! I’m going to replace TBD with staking = BANK required to have voting rights.

Media nodes driving to paid services must pay a recurring fee

I like the idea of the DAO getting a fee if someone finds the node via the DAO and subscribes to a paid service. In your head, how would a recurring fee work? I thought maybe getting a “referral fee” would be another option (i.e., the DAO gets a % of the initial subscription). Thoughts?

I still think the media node should provide value for “free”. I don’t really like the idea of driving traffic to a media node if it’s paywalled and there isn’t any value available for free. Agree? Disagree?

Champions should be compensated for each formal verification. Perhaps we assign a standard price to each applicant and let champions choose their preference. Champions shouldn’t have more than 5 obligations at one time.

No objections from me! I’ll see how I can work it in. Do you think the money to compensate Champions would come from the DAO treasury? Any thoughts on what fair compensation might be?

We need a discovery process for how media nodes interact with the DAO and what type of mutually beneficial relationship we can build.

Totally agree! I’m open to ideas on the best ways to do that and am happy to do the leg work (I don’t really have any media contacts :frowning: )

I’m also going to chime in on the writer’s guild proposal suggesting that the ability to create bounties for the writers guild is restricted to BanklessDAO members and media nodes. I thought that could be another potential benefit for becoming a media node.

1 Like
5

That was my intention with the “Point of Contact” question. I’ll update it to clarify we need actual contact info, not just a name. Thanks for the feedback!

1 Like
6

I thought maybe getting a “referral fee” would be another option

I like referral code better.

Do you think the money to compensate Champions would come from the DAO treasury? Any thoughts on what fair compensation might be?

Yes. Perhaps 100 $BANK each?

7

Here is what I have drafted thus far to update to the committee verification and champion members:

Media Node Committee

  • The Media Node Committee is made of Champion members which will facilitate onboarding media node applicants.
  • Champion members are chosen based on nominations and voted upon.

Media Node Applies or a Bankless DAO member submits a lead

  • Media nodes submit an [application]
  • The application is added to the database of media nodes requiring verification
  • A Champion is assigned to the media node with the responsibility of facilitating onboarding the media node and collecting necessary info for verification.
  • The Media Node Committee is responsible for verifying and approving the applicant as a Bankless DAO media node with a simple majority vote.

How should the champion members be voted on?

8

I like it!

How should the champion members be voted on?

I think 75% of respondents in support in the first two days after nomination might be a good voting process. I don’t have any logic behind those numbers, except they felt reasonable.

We could have a genesis team member do an @ channel somewhere announcing the nomination and let people vote yes or no as emojis (e.g., :+1: or :-1:).

approving the applicant as a Bankless DAO media node with a simple majority vote.

I think a gut check poll in discord and then a snapshot vote to finalize it. They will be publicly associated with the Bankless DAO brand, so I think a formal vote is warranted.

The Champion can be responsible for writing up their findings from the verification process for the snapshot description.

9

A referral code sounds awesome. I’m going to add revenue from referrals to one of the DAO benefits/contributions to join. Obviously only if they have a paid service. I’m thinking of it as a donation to the bankless movement.

Yes. Perhaps 100 $BANK each?

I’m down for that.

If the price of BANK ever goes up substantial we’ll probably want to update the reward or peg it to a fix amount of stable coin (e.g., 10 DAI worth of BANK)

1 Like
10

Does the Bankless DAO have a clearly defined list of Values that we can point to in terms of verifying if a media node is violating the bankless values?
I like that slashing gets put to a vote but “bad behaviour” is an ambiguous term. It would be nice if we could point to a “constitution” of sorts to cast definitive judgment

Also I would like to add that we must ensure that Media nodes do not use the Bankless mantle to advance certain political or social causes. If the mission statement is to reach 1 billion people, then this movement has to be a non partisan movement. We can’t allow side issues to create schisms in the community. If a Bankless media node is using the platform to advance unrelated causes, or conflating them with the movement, then this should constitute “bad behaviour.”

1 Like
11

@Leemers We need to have a larger discussion about mission, vision, goal. You raise a good point. Luckily we won’t be enacting the media node process for some weeks. Plenty of time to narrow down the details.

2 Likes
12

Sounds like we have one of our first jobs for the writer’s guild!

1 Like
13

This makes sense, the DAO as a whole should get to decide if a media node is accepted. If ultimately the DAO should vote via snapshot, should approving the applicant follow the same process as approving a proposal?

Here is process for proposals:
Initially governance proposals will start as discussions in the Grants/Funding channel or through ideas generated on community calls. From there, any good initial ideas and initiatives can be shown support by reacting to the message with an :fire: emoji along with an encompassing discussion.

If there’s a significant amount of support or discussions around the topic, the author(s) can draft up a more formalized spec. Once written, a moderator will open up a specific channel for that discussion, signaling, amends and more.

I think this process makes sense but with more reliance on the champion and committee to facilitate the initial steps after a media node applies. In the end though the information collected to verify the media node and make the decision needs to be documented and presented to the DAO much like a proposal so that the DAO is informed prior to going to a snapshot vote.

1 Like
14

That overall process sounds good to me!

I think for media nodes, it might make more sense to post in #media-nodes instead of #proposals. My thought process is that #media-nodes is to be a place where “…other DAOs or companies can make offers to the DAO for consideration.” It feels like getting a media node approved is more aligned with that than a proposal. I don’t have strong feelings though if the community prefers the initial vote to happen someplace else.

It sounds like the overall flow is application submitted → committee assigns a champion → champion verifies → champion submits to #proposals/#media-nodes/#someplace for a gut check yes/no poll → if the media-node receives sufficient support → genesis team moves the poll to snapshot to finalize.

1 Like
15

I think all the feedback so far has been worked into the google doc. I tried to update the main post to reflect the current iteration, but I don’t think I have the ability to edit it anymore.

2 Likes
16

Just read through the proposal and have some thoughts / input:

  1. What’s the goal for the poll on champion members? Get it done quick or get a represantive vote? Because two days seems quite short to get a lot of people involved. Also would the Champion need to introduce himself in some form before the vote?

  2. In terms of verification it might make sense to implemend a scoring model to judge on legitimacy or trustworthiness. This would lead to more objective decisions and might fasten the process. But it was just a quick thought and would need a deep dive as to figure out if it is possible to identify criteria which are comparable between different kind of nodes.
    Another idea would be to have at least two Champions who need to validate. But not sure if this is to resource-intensive.

  3. Validating reach: what about metrics like TAI or CPM, Number of followers, subsribers…i think every node that which is doing it as living will provide them in some form.

17

I suspect it would be a quick vote. Read here. Champions would be chosen by the people that are the most involved with media node management. People who are closest to the ground. Two champions per app could work too.

1 Like
18

  1. You make a good point. What if the process was updated to say a Champion has to volunteer with a blurb on the forum about why they’re applying and their qualifications and then the DAO would do a soft consensus vote with emojis with a five day voting period.

  2. Adding some objectivity to the verification process sounds great to me. I’ll keep it in mind when we’re working on the verification template and let you know so you can help or give feedback if you’d like.

  3. Thanks for the suggestion! I’ll try to work it into the application. Any suggestions on the best way to word that question?

19

Right now I’m leaning towards applications being submitted as posts on a forum and then there’s a five day voting period that’s open to DAO voting members. My reasoning is

  • The media nodes we accept will reflect on the DAO, and the Champions are the first line of defense to protect the DAO’s reputation. It would be good to know a little about the people doing that vetting and make sure everyone has a chance to read the application and voice their opinion.
  • From a long term perspective, it might be good if support of a current Champion isn’t required to apply. It can be a fail safe in case the committee gets corrupted and stops acting in the DAOs best interest. I have no reason to think that will happen, but it might be nice to have a lever to pull in a worst case scenario.
1 Like
20

I guess that’s true and in this case 2 days would be enough since people are involved and know they need to vote. And in combination with 2 champions risk for wrong behaviour is reduced.

Yes sure, keep me in the loop. Still trying to find a role so looking at different topics. I created a scoring modell within my master thesis. Maybe this could be adjusted.

Will think about it tonight if not too late already.