This draft proposal was cancelled and split into two proposals. Please see:
For archival purposes, raw .md metadata of original EP6 proposal is available on on IPFS for moderators and the public.
Sharing this here as it’s new information that may affect this.
I’ve moved this to Draft Proposals temporarily. Only @moderators should be able to create posts in the active proposals category; to move a proposal to active you need to request it and demonstrate that there is consensus on a vote being put forward.
Given the recently announced termination of Brantly from TNL, and the fact that a replacement director for the Foundation will need to be found - about which there has been no discussion so far - I think it would be productive to wait for some input from people before advancing to an up-and-down Snapshot vote.
My personal view is that the DAO should hold nominations and elections for a replacement director, before dismissing anyone from the role.
I’m the largest ENS holder delegating to Brantly & have been asked to consider delegating to someone else.
Open to considering all this but I have a few questions & thoughts:
Is there a doc detailing Brantly’s responsibilities in his role? Does terminating mean complete exclusion & how will that impact the operation of ENS? If he is terminated, who will replace him? Brantly has proven to be an excellent operator and his exclusion could be severely damaging to ENS.
I want to echo Lefteris’ thoughts here. Being a minority myself, I’m personally against the bigotry expressed in Brantly’s tweets. But I want to give him the benefit of the doubt and let him post a more detailed response to what he thinks about all of this.
Brantly is famous for saying that we’ve been airdropped responsibility and not free money. I hope he also understands that Brantly in 2022 has been airdropped more power, as well as more responsibility, than the Brantly from 2016.
Even if his opinions don’t change, which I think is his right, the way he expresses them needs to evolve and become more nuanced. This is simply what leadership for a project that might touch billions someday demands.
Thanks Nick. This should indeed be in drafts.
I am guessing that the delegates and the community will receive a word from TNL about the next steps, or at least a nudge in some direction? I am unsure by what means people can give their input. I won’t be surprised if many people have this question. ENS Discourse is now a well-attended forum.
Hi @codemonkey,
The Community WG is gathering a timeline of how things have come to pass so far. See here: ENS DAO next steps re: Brantly - #15 by spencecoin
@spencecoin will update his post to hopefully provide a clear detailed picture of how Brantly was offered several (massive understatement) chances to correct his public position and amend his words but he declined those with disdain and went on to get embroiled in literally hate speech with nearly 4000 listeners on Twitter spaces. We all liked Brantly a lot but the critical mass has reached now and thresholds have been crossed. It is pretty cool that you have been asked to reconsider; it shows DAOs work as they are supposed to.
Some of your questions remain unanswered but I am unaware of the answers myself. Stick around and you’ll find out what to do next at the same time as the rest of us. Re-delegating your votes at this point is a no-brainer at least; you can find at least 1.2k delegate applications here.
Is there a recording of this specific part you’re talking about? There have been quite a few spaces and I couldn’t find the one being referenced.
There is no timeline / detailed picture that I’m working on - the information that is available is all the information that exists.
This is shared in ENS DAO next steps re: Brantly
In that case, I will summarise it in the draft proposal. Thanks
@nick.eth @spencecoin I have made the necessary changes. I believe that the draft is now in mature form and only lacks the Snapshot link.
Thanks for the link, missed that in all the threads.
Haven’t made a decision on switching delegates yet and hope to still to hear from Brantly given everything he’s read since then.
TBH, I don’t have that much of an issue with Brantly’s beliefs. Sure, they are quite wildly against what I stand for, but the world is a large place and it’s important that a wide variety of perspectives exist and are heard.
What is troubling is that Brantly doesn’t seem to recognize the new responsibility that comes with his position as ENS gains more importance.
From the spaces, he claims that he should be able to tweet what he wants and that expressing mainstream religious views shouldn’t exclude you from web3. IMO, no one is seriously thinking about stopping him from participating in web3. The issue is he’s not just a participant, he’s a prominent leader in arguably one of the most important protocols in web3.
Such a position requires understanding that communication to a large audience is lossy. And that achieving the best outcomes requires internalizing how your message will be received by a diverse set of listeners. It’s fine if he needs to grow into this role, but I worry it’s not something he realizes he needs to get better at.
He answered the next day:
Disciplinary actions started after this. He has shown no intent to internalise the world around him as you expect him to, sadly.
I am a bit confused which one is the proposal, I thought that was already the other post tweeted by ensdao.eth twitter account.
In any case if this here ends up what is being voted on I have stated my current thoughts in the other post here: ENS DAO next steps re: Brantly - #10 by lefterisjp
Given this might be a pretty significant change to his model of the world, I’d hope to give him at least a week to take it all in. 
I’ve listened to most of the Alisha twitter space yesterday and while I understand the pov opposing brantly I still think we haven’t given him the freedom of expression and the chance to apologize, neither have we considered other alternative solutions like sanctions and punishments instead of radical termination.
So the way it is now, if the proposal has only the Yes/No options, I might lean towards No. Not because I agree with him, but because of the short-sightedness of this proposal and the lack of responsability. None of you have come up with alternatives or seriously considered the aftermath of this decision on ENS.
Please discuss this thoroughly before taking terminal decisions. Drastic decisions that are pushed by people that have absolutely no skin in ENS who will get what they want and never contribute here again, are not decisions that I will personally stand behind.
It looks like he has already been terminated and the DAO had no say in it.
I don’t see how this could have been handled worse.
Is there any point to this proposal anymore considering the fact that TNL has terminated Brantly’s employment?
Doesn’t that already also translate directly to his role in the DAO?
Do we need to drag this on further and polarize an already polarized community even more for the duration of time a snapshot vote would take place?
I suggest you modify to “Director role” as DoO was his title within TNL, not the one at the ENS foundation.
Not for TNL, but Nick suggested to hold voting to decide the replacement of a director of ENS foundation itself after the replacement is nominated. Brantly's position as TNL's Director of Operations
He has been terminated from his position at TNL, not at the ENS Foundation. Yet.
