Details
Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw
Stewards:
- @5pence.eth (5pence.eth | X), Lead Steward
- @alextnetto.eth (netto.eth | X)
- @daostrat.eth (daostrat.eth| X)
Agenda
- Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
- General DAO Updates Section
- Open Space for SPP Discussion
- Open Discussion
—
Notes
1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
- Looker Studio is public!
- Endowment - $74M (70% eth / 30% stables)
- Better yield expected due to:
- Migrating from DAI to USDS
- Stakewise stopped bribing, which brought down the yield.
- The Onchain proposal for permissions has passed
- Reports and financials will be published next week on the forum
- Stablecoins yielding from 2.5-4%
- ETH staking yield: 2.5-3%
- Waiting week to week to decide on TWAP execution
- Enough runway so no need to rush it
2. General DAO Updates Section
2.1 Open Space for SPP Discussion
- The vote officially starts on Wednesday, 8pm UTC (4pm EST)
- The vote will end on Monday afternoon/night.
UI updates
- Updated spreadsheet to manually analyze the results of the test vote.
- The spreadsheet is the source of truth, so the UIs should be compared with it
- All calculations came out the same/correct.
- Everyone feels good and confident about it.
- One issue remains - long names of some applicants (Ethereum Identity Foundation)
- Voting UI, Walk through and UI information (please share with other delegates): SPP2 - Voting Walk Through
3. Open Discussion
Thomas’s Forum Post and Concerns
- Thomas posted a discussion on the forum: Toward Accountable and Strategic Funding in ENS - it brings up valid concerns, and everyone is invited to comment.
Post Discussion TL;DR
- SPP is inefficient, delegates aren’t equipped, have no time to review 25+ applications, no incentives, or are misaligned.
- Solution: Create a paid technical committee to review and guide funding. This would be properly compensated, it would bring more accountability, and better capital allocation.
- Delegates are overwhelmed, lack time/context, burnout is real, no technical expertise in some cases to asses what’s best for ENS.
- No one calls out bad work; no accountability or cancellations for SP stream for underperforming projects.
- Solution: Add an admin layer, improve transparency, allow iteration, etc.
- Agreed that these changes are too big to do for this year’s program.
- Overall sentiment: SPP is valuable, but there’s room for improvement.
- Needs more structure, not a full reset.