Comments on ENS Foundation Director Nominees

The former. It arose for me because of the application to be a delegate.

It perhaps wasn’t communicated as clearly as it could be; the applications were for being listed in the delegates interface on the claim site. Anyone can be delegated to, with or without an application.

1 Like

Here are my questions to our Cayman Islands solicitor, and her responses:

The articles don’t specify that the council can replace a director, only that they can appoint or remove one. Could the council vote on a single notice that both removes a director and appoints a replacement, or would they have to be separate notices?

there is no problem with a single notice that would be sent to the Company noting that X is removed and that Y is appointed. The notice simply is to inform the Company of the action that the Council requires the Company to take based on the outcome of the token votes.

Could a notice be voted on that has multiple options (eg, selecting a replacement director from a list of nominees, or no change), in such a manner that the result of the vote determines the action required by the notice?

from our perspective, there would be no issue doing this as long as it is consistent with the token voting procedures and current protocols in place. Governance procedures that currently govern the Council/ENS Tokenholders (if any) need to also be followed.

If the answer to the previous question is yes, does it have to use first-past-the-post voting, or can we use whatever voting system seems most suitable?

whatever system most suitable to ensure the outcome of token voting is clear, provided that any rules or governance procedures that currently govern the Council/ENS Tokenholders are also followed.

Based on these responses, I would say that no amendments are required to the AOI, and we can use whatever voting process seems most suitable. We could pass a social proposal to prescribe which voting methods should be used for what kinds of votes, however.


It does provide clarity that there be consistency “with the token voting procedures and current protocols in place,” whatever they may be, and that the outcome(s) of a vote are clearly understood.

I agree with your assessment that no amendment is warranted and that Council, ENS Tokenholders, and ENS DAO are all one in the same.


FYI: This should be addressed before any proposal goes up. Or at least it should be made clear what the compensations might look like or if there is an active proposal to address this. This has already been echoed in another thread that I now cannot find.

potentially we need to update our Governance Process Glossary section, with a clear explicit definitions: of Delegate and Listed Delegate
the only section we have about that is:

Delegation : ENS holders cannot vote or create proposals until they delegate their voting rights to an address. Delegation can be given to one address at a time, including the holder’s own address. Note that delegation does not lock tokens; it simply adds votes to the chosen delegation address

The ENS DAO Delegate Applications with its terminology gives a false impression that ENS Delegate is the ones who filled the application -Only-, while in fact any address with ENS voting rights -even 1- is an ENS Delegate and will be castVoteBySig at ensdao.eth EPs but not -and despite the fact that not- every ENS Delegate is a Listed Delegate at

1 Like

Apparently, my delegate application, filed shortly after the airdrop, as a “Listed Delegate” was denied. What are the objective criteria or is it solely a subjective process? How can one be reconsidered for being listed or am I doomed to be a second-class delegate?

The only posts we deleted were those that were unrelated (Eg, weren’t delegate applications), or were direct copy-pastes of other applications. I don’t see any deleted posts by you on that thread.

I didn’t say that anything was deleted. I said, apparently, my application was denied, as I’m not listed as a delegate.

Why does the ENS Foundation Director position need to be elected by the DAO?

Specially, this current DAO.

This DAO reacted exactly the opposite I would expect from a DAO controlling what we claim to be the foundation of Ethereum Web3. I would not trust voting on perhaps the most important position just below the founders of this project to this current DAO.

No one knows more about the qualifications required for this position other than Nick and Brantly. I would suggest letting the core devs (not the DAO Delegates) decide on an interim (or even permanent) candidate. Otherwise, we risk selecting a candidate that does not meet the qualifications and one that may decide to step down (or even get replaced) making the ENS DAO a complete joke in the eyes of the community. Once again.

The Articles of Association of The ENS Foundation sets forth the procedure for appointing the Director, which we must abide by.


I quote:

The ENS Foundation’s Articles of Incorporation give significant powers to the ENS DAO (referred to as “The Council” in the Articles). The DAO may vote to:

  • Appoint or remove a director, member, or supervisor.

  • Prohibit admitting any members in future.

  • Instruct the directors to wind up the foundation, and specify what charity or other foundation should receive the foundation’s assets.

The key word is “may” thus I brought the question. But I suppose at this point the Foundation has accepted to Move for a Dao Appointment.

My follow up question is, does the ENS community feel like the current DAO can successfully find a replacement for this position?

1 Like

The Council is putting forth a vote to decide the question. In my opinion, answering your second question, I believe so.


You show up in the claim app just fine:

The council may choose not to vote, in which case nothing changes. There is no power in the articles for anyone else to appoint or remove a director.



In my view, you meet the minimum qualifications to serve. But it’s the community that chooses.

Good Luck!

1 Like

I would want to discourage the selection of @inplco for this position. My reasons for opposing his nomination are as follows:

  1. inplco played an extremely active and partisan role in herding community opinion during the original incident. While I appreciate that active and involved community discussion is necessary for the governance process, I personally felt his contributions to be too partisan, inflammatory, and coercive (not allowing room for doubt/responding aggressively to anyone expressing doubts about his opinions/appealing to emotions, incredulity, authority/urging immediate action and aggravation).

  2. My perceptions of his conduct can be subjective and i acknowledge that. So, I can understand if my above reservations are discarded. However, his public/partisan involvement (regardless of my views on its propriety) raises an important issue about the conflict of interest in this situation. As one of the most visible proponents for Brantly’s removal. His subsequent selection as Brantly’s replacement would set up an extremely questionable precedent and cast doubt on the motivations of anyone engaging in community accountability in the future.

My suggestion would be to stay away from candidates who can be perceived to have been too partisan in this issue. @AvsA would make an excellent candidate in my opinion. I am pretty new to the ENS ecosystem so I wasn’t sure if I knew enough to make a good choice, but I’m happy to see that many have nominated him already.

1 Like

I agree with this. If I was a bystander, I’ll say the exact same thing and for good reason. I am sure no one sees me as a serious candidate against avsa.eth but I am here to represent not to win. (I have been told that I am a serious candidate :man_shrugging:). Anyway, I hope it will encourage outsiders to play active role in governance and encourage DAO onboarding.

1 Like

I think anyone will show up in the claim app. @berrios.eth is probably talking about his delegate application here on Discourse so he could be listed as a Delegate. I am pretty sure he was mistakenly overlooked since that application list is probably parsed by hand.

On the side note, this is another loophole that needs plugging:

The “delegate” badge is assigned automatically based on whether the associated account has any votes delegated to it. @berrios.eth If you at least delegate your own votes to yourself, I can update your status in the forum.

1 Like

I believe I have re-delegated my votes back to myself.


1 Like