A public apology

🗳️ Meta-Governance
1

Yesterday I’ve published Executable Proposal 5.24, which right now has been completely rejected by the DAO. I believe I owe this community an explanation and an apology.

What happened?

Recently we have approved 5 social proposals that require transfers from treasury into the working groups: the 3 budgets to each WG as well as a Security Bounty for Blockful and a Governance Distribution. Despite the last two not being funds for Metagov directly, they required a hedge vesting contract which meant that we would need the funds in the metagov wallet before executing all the required transactions to transfer these out.

Traditionally all WG funding are bundled into a single Executable proposal to save the delegates time. A few weeks ago I had suggested also bundling the last two ones in the same, which I felt was an idea that was well received on the call. This not only saves delegates time but since executable proposals are more dangerous than social ones, it allows scrutiny to be concentrated in less transactions.

My fellow stewards however later disagreed with my assessment and asked not to bundle the transactions. In fact Spence wrote the EP description not expecting it to be a bundle at all. Despite this, when I went to actually submit the proposal I decided to bundle it again, and edit the post description to reflect that, which is what was submitted.

However because I updated the details in a rush and did not inform clearly the changes, the delegates saw the discrepancy and thought it might have been an error, which was followed by rejection votes on procedural grounds, and then an avalanche of rejections to that particular proposal.

I want to clarify that the proposal code did not contain issues, nor it was a mistake. I still believe that bundling transactions in a single EP is a good practice which is not prohibited by the rules (I fundamentally disagree with the logic that anything not explicitly permitted is forbidden) — in fact it has been done before. I believe there is a valid debate when to bundle or not to bundle transactions, or either some proposals (like 5.21) could’ve gone directly into executable, and either side can present good arguments. But I don’t want to argue these now.

The issue, as I see was of miscommunication and procedure. I failed to properly communicate my decision to bundle, I added almost an extra million dollar to the proposal without editing the description with the required care, and I disrespected my fellow metagov colleagues when I decided override their objections by publishing that without consulting them, despite their previous objections.

Good governance is invisible governance and by creating this mess I created a bad impression of the meta-governance group and by extension the governance of the ENS DAO as a whole.

Why it happened

The deeper reason behind this is that I simply haven’t been able to give my best to the DAO, and my work output has not the example I’d like to set for future governance stewards. I only volunteered to this role last year because I had under my own initiative changed the rules for the stewards and created new programs that made the life of a Metagov steward more complex and thought I should subject myself to that as an example.

But I overextended myself. Among the responsibilities of the DAO, advisor roles in other projects, my work on unrelated projects and my own family life, I simply had more responsibilities than I could handle and I failed to uphold the work I would expect from a Steward. I know it’s a cliche to say one’s taking a time from some role to focus on their family but my reality is that I do consider my real full time job foremost to be a father, and all else are works I do on the spare time.

What happens next

Because of that I am resigning from my role as Metagov steward, effectively immediately.

What this means in practice:

  • I will ask the secretary to remove my name from the payroll for November and December.
  • I will remove myself from any official steward group
  • I will attend metagov calls as only a listener unless I am asked otherwise
  • I will not be submitting any other proposals unless I am asked otherwise

I do not wish to forsake any responsibilities I have with others and as such:

  • I will still hold any duties as a ENS Foundation director unless I am asked otherwise
  • I am a member of the security council and can still be counted upon to act in case its needed
  • I do not wish to risk any issues with the Metagov multisig not having enough signatures so I will make myself available to sign transactions, if needed, until I am asked to remove myself from it
  • I will still help, as a volunteer this year and in the future, implement the Governance Pilot, help set up the next steward election, leave guidances for the service provider program, or any other ongoing project that the DAO requires.

I don’t take this decision with any ill feelings towards any of my great colleagues at the ENS DAO, if anything I feel relieved by the decision. It’s unfortunate that I won’t be at Devcon this year but I look forward to meeting you all again.

8 Likes
2

Thank you Alex for all you have done as a Metagov steward. It’s good to hear that this brings relief and now you will be able to spend more time with your family.

I do not believe that this error has significantly undermined confidence in the governance of ENS. All proposals included in the combined package were approved within the framework of social proposals. As has already been mentioned several times, such practice is a precedent. Even if the delegates had not paid attention to this and voted for the proposal, it would not have led to anything negative.

For those who blame Alex for this, I want to remind you that in addition to the 3 positions, he also regularly puts forward his own initiatives. Streams for service providers, Governance Distribution, ENS Ledger, and so on. Of the publicly proposed initiatives, this is more than anyone else in the DAO. Mistakes and miscommunications happen, and the only one who does not make mistakes is the one who does nothing.

4 Likes
3

Sad to see you resign but understand your thought process behind it. IMO, family always comes first but its a hard thing to recognize you may not be showing up for your other commitments with the same level of commitment. Respect to the way you’ve communicated around this and hope you’ll stay close.

1 Like
4

@AvsA - You are as much a part of the fabric of ENS as any other single human being. All of us that participate in the protocol governance or use ENS names stand on your shoulders.

I know you’ll still be deeply involved as a Foundation Director, large delegate, and Security Council member. I’m glad you’ll be getting back a bit more father and family time. Thank you sir. :saluting_face:

3 Likes
5

@AvsA, if this brings you peace of mind, then it’s absolutely the right call. Thank you for all the amazing work and support you’ve put in as a Metagov Steward this year. You’ve played a huge role in making ENS one of the best-run DAOs in the space. It’s great to know you’ll still be involved in key roles within the DAO. Enjoy your family time!

3 Likes
6

I’m really sorry to hear you’re stepping down, Alex. Although I also disagreed with bundling the proposals like this, and think it was a mistake, you were absolutely an asset to the ENS DAO as a MG WG steward, and the DAO will be poorer to lose you in this capacity.

3 Likes
7

Thank you for all your work as a meta-gov steward. I respect your decision and know your impact will be felt for a long time.

I just wanted to mention that I’ve always joined the meta-gov calls with deep respect and have seen firsthand how much everyone in the group cares about the well-being of the DAO. Personally, I’ve learned so much from your initiatives, the knowledge you brought, and the insights you shared along the way.

Thank you again for everything you’ve contributed. All the best as you move forward, and I hope you’ll stay close. :sparkling_heart:

4 Likes
8

Thank you for all you have done for ENS.

So many of us would not be as involved without your initiatives and efforts.

Thank you again and take care of yourself.

1 Like
9

We’ve all been there my friend - regularly taking upon ourselves more than we can take. Sad to see you step down. I learned a lot in the past year from your views, comments, initiatives, and proposals. But you do what’s best for you! Thank you :saluting_face:

2 Likes
10

Thanks for all the kind words. It’s something that I’ve been thinking for a lot longer than this one issue. I will still be around a lot: just on my own pace.

11 Likes
11

@AvsA Overextending ourselves on projects and endeavors that we’re passionate about is an easy thing to do. Your contributions to ENS are long-standing and great. Although, you unfortunately won’t be finishing the term, your decision to focus on family is commendable. They and the DAO are fortunate to have you.

1 Like
12

Sorry, this one is on me. I was not comfortable with this approach and I should have made that even more clear on the Meta-Governance call, although I did express uncertainty about the approach publicly.

—

While I agree that we should continue to adopt a permissive approach when interpreting the existing governance framework, I would argue that some guardrails are necessary and should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

For example, there is some confusion over whether all funding requests should follow a social → executable proposal flow. As far as I know, only one rule specifies a procedure that applies exclusively to the collective proposal for the Working Group funding request.

In the case of EP 5.24, it may have been helpful to explicitly state what is and is not recommended—i.e., whether bundling the collective proposal with other proposals requesting a transfer of funds or assets is permitted.

—

Probably, EP 5.21 could have been an executable, but there has been an implicit (mis)understanding that all funding requests require a social vote first. Now, we know that might not be the case, as EP 5.22 did not require a social vote.

—

Even if you had communicated that, I would have interpreted it as a unilateral decision on your part.

—

Alex, I looked up to you. I am really disappointed by this outcome and don’t think it sets a good example, as an ENS Foundation director, to have allowed this to happen.

—

—

To be honest, I don’t think it sends a good signal to the DAO to categorize proposals as mere perfunctory tasks, which I read as implicit in your suggestion.

Delegates should exercise careful consideration, and Meta-Governance stewards should strive to provide all necessary information to support informed decision-making.

—

While your role and involvement have been sine qua non to evolution of the DAO and ENS, I think it’s important that we hold ourselves accountable and communicate in earnest our thoughts and intentions with our peers. I cannot say that I believe you’ve been completely forthcoming in this case.

Unilaterally deciding to bundle the proposals together at the very last minute was a brazen and underhanded move that I find inconsiderate to the Meta-Governance Working Group, the individual proposers, and all who would have benefited from the proposals included herein and creates an inconvenience overall.

Of course, I accept your apology as well, but I really, really wish things didn’t have to be this way. As a first-time steward and a relatively new contributor to the ENS DAO, I had hoped for more.

—

Sounds good, the least we can do is ensure the continuation of the Governance Distribution Pilot and the Service Provider Program.

Please take care of yourself and thank you for all you’ve done for ENS and Ethereum overall. I look forward to collaborating with you.

16

Many thanks for your continuous contribution to ENS Alex! Contributions to the MetaGov WG and wider DAO shall be remembered forever!

Also very pleased you’re going to continue as a foundation director.

Do you have any thoughts on this post, I wonder if the MetaGov WG is better off finishing the year with two active members and you in a ‘supporting’ role; cc attending calls and staying on the multisig.

The main reason being that I’m not convinced a steward is going to be able to onboard and start contributing meaningfully with Devcon and the holiday season approaching.

I don’t feel overly strongly here - interested in input from other WG stewards and the wider community!

17

The delegates have shown a preference for stricter adherence to procedure. Perhaps the next term’s Metagov Stewards could update the rules to allow for greater pragmatism and discretion. In the meantime, an election seems unavoidable, despite the practical realities.

1 Like
18

I’m saddened to see you step down, but I understand that balancing work and life is challenging, and ultimately, you need to do what’s best for you and your family.

Thank you, Alex, for all that you’ve done for ENS and the DAO. :pray:

19

Respect your decision here Avsa and thank you for all the work you have put in this year for the DAO. You have brought important initiatives such as the Service Provider stream to life and stepped up to see it in its first iteration (among others).

Continue to look forward to your contributions to the ENS ecosystem at large in your role on the Foundation and beyond. :saluting_face:

2 Likes
20

I resonate with most of the messages above.

Thank you for all you have done, bringing your unique vision and sharing it in such an open and collaborative way. You onboarded many contributors to the DAO (including myself) and the wider ecosystem. I’m grateful.

That’s a huge example of self-accountability you’re setting through the attitude of recognizing and acting. Showing again your work ethic.

Enjoy your family time, is the noblest and biggest responsibility a human might have in it’s life!