We had another great call on the ENS mission statement. The conversation almost got heated as we discussed public goods and how they relate to ENS. to everyone who was able to make it.
We narrowed down the mission statements to the following five.
Our mission is to empower web3 citizens to interact easily with people, organizations, and smart contracts through self-sovereign identities.
Our mission is to provide all people absolute ownership of their identity as a public good - across the web and beyond.
Our mission is to provide web3 natives with self-sovereign identities forever as a public good for the betterment of all.
Our mission is to enable all people ownership of their identities for everything as a public good.
Our mission is to provide absolute ownership of identity for all as a fundamental utility and a public good.
Request
In a few days, we will be taking a poll on twitter for three of the above options. I’d like to get a temperature check on the above from the forum community, please vote for your top three favorites.
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
0voters
Lastly, free to make suggestions in the comments below. The results will be visible only after the poll closes.
First of all, is there a public calendar to join these calls?
Secondly, I believe this mission statements is actually quite interesting, because it almost acts like an objective focus mission.
For example.
This will be the first layer and aim of the ENS Mission, since it’s already there, and web3 citizen are already using it, then what comes next is the connection through ENS to all relevant vectors from the web3 space.
This would be also a short to mid term mission, since it only refers to the web3 spectrum.
This two works as mid term missions, since its scope is outside the web3, and would require availability and onboarding of outsiders of web3 space.
And finally this one, the idea of ENS being something fundamental on all levels, seems to me like a long term goal.
I find #2, #4 and #5 impossibly vague and too broad in scope to either understand or vote for. For example: what do you mean by ‘across the web and beyond’?
I like #4.
I like how t removes the word “people” and uses “all”, (we want to include users beyond just people).
I would consider adding the word “provide”, (ie: Our mission is to enable and provide…).
I would consider adding the word “right”, (ie: fundamental utility, right, and a public good.).
We post the zoom link in Events and we mention it in the discord as well.
Great mission statement give organizations focus and clarity. By articulating why the organization exist and who it serves in a language that anyone can understand.
@slobo.eth I think you’re doing great with organizing the meetings and writing call summaries. It’s going smoothly despite the flood of ideas and possible iterations of statements.
I’d like to see the final statements polled on a larger platform before moving to a proposal.
My thoughts on the top three...
4. Our mission is to enable all people ownership of their identities for everything as a public good.
Out of the three that polled well, this is my favorite or maybe a tie with #1. It leaves out any mention of smart-contracts or web3, but I’m in favor of plain language.
1. Our mission is to empower web3 citizens to interact easily with people, organizations, and smart contracts through self-sovereign identities.
This stands among the five as one of the best. Particularly the wording “people, organizations, and smart contracts.” I’m in the camp of “absolute identity” > “self-sovereign identity,” but it works here. Is Web3 Citizens too narrow of description?
2. Our mission is to provide all people absolute ownership of their identity as a public good - across the web and beyond.
I like this the least. The clause after the em dash is dangling and misplaced. You can omit it, but you lose the context of “the web.” If you place the clause inside the sentence such as: “…provide all people absolute ownership of their identity on the web, and beyond, as a public good,” it becomes muddled.
To offer a suggestion, here’s a bridge between 1 and 4: “Our mission is to provide all people, organizations, and smart contracts absolute ownership of their identities as a public good.”
This suggestion leaves out web3 and replaces sovereign with absolute. It’s also slightly vague, but this works in its favor because it’s easy for everyone to understand and avoids unnecessary jargon. “Smart contracts” is jargon, but I think there’s enough context there. It’s also existing language from ENS documentation which is a +1.
I agree that the mission statement should aim to use more inclusive language to define whom ENS serves.
“All people” seems to exclude organizations, smart contracts, and other non-people entities.
“Web3 natives” — depending on your definition — seems to exclude non-Web3 natives etc.
The ENS Constitution does a good job of avoiding being too specific. “People” are not mentioned at all; “Users” are mentioned just once.
Vitalik’s mention of “users and objects” in context of ENS captures the breadth of service, but probably doesn’t quite capture the spirit of the mission.
Events