YIP-111 Gov-Ops Council Creation (Beta Test)

Gov-Ops Council Creation (Beta Test)

Introduction

Part of the YAM Re-Org that we have been working on in the last few months includes the creation of a new advisory group of contributors who are empowered to help run and streamline the operations and governance of the DAO. This group would have a limited scope of powers intended to make it easier for token holders and grant applicants to perform their required tasks to make the new system run smoothly.

I have put together a full write-up on the scope and responsibilities of this new group, from here on called the Gov-Ops Council, in this document: https://github.com/yam-finance/documents/blob/master/govops/govops-council.md

Building on this document, I am proposing that the DAO implement an initial beta version of this council to start performing these tasks and working out the kinks and what scope may or may not need to be added. I want to be clear that this would be a temporary measure while the complete specification for the group is worked out. Implementing the grants model with the current contributors while we continue to work it out has been very helpful in understanding where the pain-points are for the process, and I expect similar benefits from this working implementation.

Beta Implementation

The proposed beta implementation would begin with 3 members: @Ross, @Feddas, and @ethe . They will be responsible for the scope of work laid out in the linked document above (under scope of work). Since we do not have the full nomination and voting model worked out, I propose the following addendum to that document:

Each of the above members will present the scope of work that they intend to fulfill within the Gov-Ops council and the expected amount of time they expect to spend on that work, with a not-to-exceed amount. Initial term to be 2 months (to align with the quarterly periods) and each member will get a separate snapshot vote to ratify their membership.

during the beta test, @desiger and @ross will collect feedback on the process and use this information to craft the Gov-Ops Service Agreement, which will enshrine the roles and responsibilities of the council more concretely. Research into voting processes and standing up a voting front-end will also be worked on as part of the Gov-Ops silo work.

After the 2 months are up, we will review the state of the Gov-Ops council and adjust as needed in the next implementation.

Member Roles

Ross

I expect to perform the following roles, which are an subset of what I currently do for the DAO:

  • Communicate with applicants and community members to clarify the process to apply for funding from YAM.
  • Make recommendations about the completeness of applications for funding.
  • Manage bookkeeping and governance flows. Collate approved consensus actions into one location used as a source of truth for creating on chain execution transactions.
  • Communicate with different Silos about their expected needs and outline requirements to get their transactions included within the monthly on-chain proposal contracts.
  • Review monthly on-chain transaction and vet them for security and accuracy to the best of my ability. Coordinate with 0xE on what needs to go into them.
  • Maintain and moderate of the following infrastructure:
    • Discord server.
    • Discourse server (forum).
    • Minor maintenance of the main website (https://yam.finance).

Time Commitment: 20 hours a month expected. Not to exceed 40 hours a month. Hours to be recorded and accounted for in monthly transparency reports.

Compensation: Base rate of $85/h, 100% in yam tokens based on the 30day avg value.


E

I expect to perform the following roles, which are an subset of what I currently do for the DAO:

  • Assist contributors with the governance and payment processes.
  • Develop, manage and coordinate onchain proposals interacting with the yam governance contracts, including testing, deployment, proposing, execution and following through with the transactions. Approved transactions include*:
    • Payouts for approved contributor payments and grants.
    • Replenishing multisig wallets.
    • Yam Treasury assets transfers and deposits.
    • Swapping and trading Yam Treasury assets through uniswap and exchanges.
    • Depositing and removing UMA tokens from UMA 2Key Contracts.
    • Interact with other approved contracts*.
  • Maintain existing services and systems, including:
    • Yam Website DApp.
    • Yam API and dev docs.
    • Github Organization including related repos and services.
    • Servers.
    • Webhosts.
    • Gitbook.
    • Snapshot.
    • Discord.
    • Telegram.
  • Coordinate and prepare multi-sig transactions.
  • Manage governance security, monitoring and maintenance.
  • Communicate with applicants and community members to clarify the process to apply for funding from YAM.
  • Make recommendations about the completeness of applications for funding, including development feedback.

* See the section below called “Not in Scope of Gov-Ops Council” for more information about what is and is not included.

Time Commitment: 40 hours expected, not to exceed 80 hours a month. Hours to be recorded and accounted for in monthly transparency reports.

Compensation: Base rate of $100/h, 100% in yam tokens based on the 30day avg value.


Feddas

I expect to perform the following roles:

  • Communicate with applicants and community members to clarify the process to apply for funding from YAM.
  • Make recommendations about the completeness of applications for funding.

Time Commitment: 15 hours a month expected. Not to exceed 30 hours a month. Hours to be recorded and accounted for in monthly transparency reports.

Comp: Base rate of $85/h, 100% in yam tokens based on the 30day avg value.


Not in Scope of Gov-Ops Council

  • Code that falls outside of the prior “off the shelf” classification is the responsibility of the Silo or Grantee that is requesting its inclusion. They should write and test the required code and either implement it in their own deployed contract that can be called by the monthly on-chain transaction, or they should coordinate with the Gov-Ops silo to include it directly into the main proposal contract. More information can be found here: https://github.com/yam-finance/documents/blob/master/govops/govops-council.md

Specification

This document will be posted publicly on the YAM discourse forum for 1 week before voting begins. Each proposed member will get their own snapshot vote, to be posted and last at least 3 days after the completion of the review period.

Assuming acceptance of all 3 votes, work on the above scope will begin in August.

1 Like

I have been involved in supporting the Yam team and governance for a while now. I am disappointed by the overall progress or lack thereof. Over the last year we have shelved old projects that were unique and somewhat successful, and nothing new or exciting is in development. We are in a bear market, community members are proposing to redeem the treasury unsuccessfully (this time), and to be blunt the existing contributors offer very little value to Yam for the compensation they recieve. It’s time for hard lines and real changes.

I nominate myself to be a part of the Gov-Ops Council to help save Yam. As part of Gov-Ops Council my primary concern will be protecting our treasury and increasing value for token holders. I will also ensure that all silos and Gov-Ops Council members are performing according to specs and the costs are justifiable with the intent to help Yam survive the bear market and prepare for the bull market.

Time Commitment: 20 hours a month expected. Not to exceed 40 hours a month. Hours to be recorded and accounted for in monthly transparency reports.

Compensation: Base rate of $85/h, split 70% in stables and 30% in yam tokens based on the 30 day avg value.

I agree with your concerns, part of the Yam re-org has been to address these issues.

I support your nomination, it would be good to get a new perspective and better accountability.

Curious what your plans are on this. This sounds kind of a like a comptroller role, which is fine and probably valuable. But I just want to make sure that you are clear that gov-ops has no real power. It is a facilitation entity that helps with the new grants process and writes on-chain transactions.

I’d also like to hear what are think is the most important thing to protect the treasury from, and how do you plan to do so?

I don’t ask these questions to try and stop anything or prevent your nomination. But ideally the role that you are proposing is that of all token holders (or maybe open to all token holders?). I know this isn’t realistic, but much of my thought around the gov-ops council is to keep it as neutral as possible and not turn it into a steering committee.

I wonder if your desired position wouldn’t be more effective as an independent one in which token holders agree to pay you to essentially be a 3rd party auditor or consultant. You could be given any access you want (we want everything open anyway) and then you can make monthly or quarterly recommendations about projects, contributors, etc. This could be extended as a more general role that anyone could apply for and there could be multiple people who are essentially independent auditors paid by token holders.

Anyone who receives other funding from the DAO (i.e. grant recipients or gov-ops members) would not make recommendations about projects and initiatives on which they work.

This would be kind of like a formalized governance delegate. In the end your recommendations need to be acted upon by token holders to be ratified.

I feel strongly that this Gov-Ops Council Creation (beta test) must be considered along with all the other proposed elements of the Yam Re-Org. The reasoning is that Yam Grants and the entire new structure that Gov-Ops supports is an integrated system.

My intention here is to emphasis that this proposal is actually married to the entire Re-Org, and as such this proposal should not be considered in isolation from the entire new structure. Since the Gov-Ops Council beta test begins the process of communicating and consensus building for the entire new system, I feel it’s important to acknowledge this interrelationship not only for this forum discussion but also for the upcoming vote.

The Gov-Ops beta test is suppose to run for 2 months from the time it is (potentially) voted in. I believe it makes sense that at the end of the beta test period consideration is given to moving to the next step in the process – an all encompassing vote to ratify the Yam Re-Org in its full form.

1 Like

The point is simply to have a solid pulse on the tasks we are choosing to pay contributors for and the value we are getting in return, including but not limited to the cost of operations of Gov Ops Council. Gov Ops Council is “a new advisory group of contributors who are empowered to help run and streamline the operations and governance of the DAO.” Let’s make sure we verify the results of streamlining operations as we move forward.

Adding systems for proposing various audits/auditors to be run by community members or to create more opportunities for the treasury to be spent on comptroller takes us further away from the intended outcome. My aim is to see Yam as nimble and efficient in this bear market so we can seize the right opportunities as they present themselves.

What I’m saying is that the role you are proposing is not within the remit of the gov-ops council as it is designed. That’s not to say that the role you are proposing is not something the DAO needs. I think it does. But I have been very careful in how I have tried to craft the gov-ops council so that it does not become an organization that decides the future of YAM. We have tried that with a ‘core team’ and it has have mixed results as you know.

I do NOT want to create a new core team with different faces and the same results. This is why the scope of gov-ops is limited. That is a good thing in my view. It means that we can have people that make sure governance is done right and we can have people who make sure that value is being added. The role of gov-ops is not to assure that value is being added, but to make it easier for contributors to contribute. Gov-Ops isn’t solving all YAM’s problems for it. It is helping others to solve those problems within the organizational framework we have designed.

Gov-ops is like Human Resources, making sure people get paid and processes are followed, with a clear mandate and scope to do that. If we want to create a role that is going to make sure YAM is moving in the “right” direction then we can do it, but don’t add that to the HR group. Make a role that does that effectively.

If you have a better vision for making yam nimble and efficient then by all means go ahead and propose it. I have made the recommendations for how I think things need to be done. I think that you would have more success (and room to maneuver) if you aren’t part of the group you are trying to keep tabs on.

I understand what you are trying to do @ross and I also understand what @jpgs.eth is worried about. There has been a mismanagement of contributor compensations and no one is accountable. You would think Operations / HR should be accountable, but this isn’t the case with this silo. Ultimately this silo of 3-5 will be paying contributors at minimum $7000 per month that won’t determine if any project is a good project, but that it check’s all the boxes and follows procedure. There’s something missing here and I think Jpgs got the right idea.

I think jpgs has the right idea too, but not as part of gov-ops.

I know it feels weird to have this group of people who kind of have little power to determine quality, but as you mentioned, it is intentional. Ideally, this would be the one role that token holders are actually responsible for.

But I also understand that is idealistic and it makes sense to have some form of delegated oversight. This is a good thing to explore and we can have a simultaneous first test of it. We don’t need any additional infrastructure for it. It can just be people who apply to governance to do it and get paid monthly like a normal contributor.

If we need to pay people to govern the DAO then we should. But lets not re-enshrine a core team right as we remove the old one. Let’s get this beta of the gov-ops started simply, and we have 2 months to figure out if it should have additional powers or if we can have separate oversight.

I’ve been looking over the forum, taking time to reflect on the state of Yam and all the conversations. A few things pop out to me:

  • The community is incredibly small.
  • The forum is an echo chamber.
  • Forum post views and discord chatter comes from the same handful of people.
  • Most people don’t want to spend time reading and commenting and getting involved in all these governance aspects. They want someone to do it for them and “number go up”.

It feels like we are doing a lot of work, just for the sake of work and to keep contributors funded. The work that is being done doesn’t add value to the project, treasury or token in a meaningful way. Contributors are siphoning off funds for no overall positive effect. It’s clear to see that Yam is failing the token holders as the market cap of the token is significantly lower than treasury value. Token holders are choosing to exit rather than participate and support.

The way I see it is that the treasury is the only thing of value right now to Yam and its token holders. There needs to be someone responsible and accountable for the treasury. Currently there are no active external projects, only internal ones that are adding complexity and overhead without any oversight. Until there is oversight by someone who is responsible and has been given a mandate to protect and increase the value of the treasury, everything else is just an exercise in futility.

I will no longer be supporting any new initiatives until we find someone that is responsible for protecting and increasing the value of the treasury. When Yam was originally created, its modus operandi was a DAO treasury created by and for the community.

I mirror many of your concerns, but I would say that we need to let the current initiatives and projects finalize to see what the potential results are. The team has spent many months already building minimal Yam Re-Org.

I withdraw my nomination to be part of Gov-Ops. In the meantime I will look forward to seeing the current initiative/project results come in.

I appreciate the review that you are doing and agree with you that oversight is incredibly important and has generally been lacking in the past. There is no easy solution for oversight and it is a big part of what I have been trying to solve for with the re-org. While the reorg does not have a direct oversight mechanism, it does set the stage for that to exist.

AFAIK you have been a part of this community since the beginning of the year as a substantial token holder (correct me if this is wrong), which is about when I started really thinking about and working on the re-org. While many community members don’t spend the time to read everything that is posted here, the fact that all of this information is available to read is a big part of the re-org. Before, there was minimal public information on what was being worked on, minimal public information on what was happening with projects, and little way to determine who was pulling their weight and who wasn’t.

While the new system isn’t perfect, there is now significantly more transparency into our operations and work than there was a year ago. This enables oversight to be crowdsourced, or if we want delegated. The re-org is not opinionated in how we manage oversight and accountability other than insisting that the information required to do so be public. I would love if accountability could be crowdsourced, but understand that realistically it may need to be delegated.

An example of this and how it helped preserve the treasury is the Yambassadors application, which was public. The application process provided enough information for me to determine that the value that we were getting was not in line with the proposal. I objected to the cost of the work ($80k over 6 months) and have subsequently done the same work in a about a week of work (over a month), and saved the DAO $55,000. In the last month we have earned over $2000 in UMA rewards from me voting.

The fact that I was able to spend the time to dive into the proposal and understand it was ostensibly due to the fact that I am paid to do that. But anyone could have done it, and we could pay other people to perform similar services. If this information were not public and published with processes developed and specified in the re-org, this would have been harder to catch.

My hope is that the re-org will allow for similar savings and oversight in other parts of the DAO as well. By posting work publicly, contributors open themselves up to scrutiny and must perform or someone should be able to call them out on it. It is then up to the token holders to act on that and either stop paying for future work or revoke the current grants that they are receiving.

You, and other token holders should now have all the information you need to determine whether things are being done the right way, and if your disagree you also have to tools to stop funding until they are.

1 Like

I agree, all of this is good progress assuming we have a growing community that shows up to contribute and vote. I hope I will be proven wrong concerning my doubts.

This position should be paid in 100% 6 month vested $YAM tokens based on the 30 day avg. value. This way we bolster incentive alignment.

I support this.

It was in my first drafts but was opposed so I dropped it.

I agree and would happily accept 100% vested Yam for all my contributions if it is in the best interest of the token holders.

Feddas

1 Like

@ethe I voted against this because I was unclear if you are ok with the recently discussed compensation terms (i.e. 100% Yam 6 Month Vesting) which we have agreed upon with @ross and @feddas. If you are agreeable with these better aligned community/contributor incentive terms I am happy to vote for you on Gov-Ops.

1 Like

I agree and am ok with that @jpgs.eth

1 Like

My only concern is as i mentioned to you earlier on over minting:

im ok with minting yam but also dont want us to over mint it, and preferably keeping the total supply capped at some point, this can affect on the token price of yam long term

1 Like