🏛️📞 MetaGov Working Group – 2025 Meetings: Tuesdays at 2pm UTC (Currently 10:00 am ET)

Details

Time: Tuesdays at 9:00 am ET (1pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. General DAO Updates Section
    1. Open Space for SPP Discussion
  3. Open Discussion

Notes :memo:

1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )

  • Endowment at $81.8M
  • Recovering from last week
  • PUR v5 on queue
  • TWAP resumed

  • Karpatkey needs a PUR update that will allow the use of USDS
  • Blockful reviewed the payload for it already
  • Endowment monthly report forum post.
  • Endomnet permissions update forum post.

2. General DAO Updates Section

2.1 Open Space for SPP Discussion

  • Recap from the discussion around service providers
  • @cap from Namespace did a 3-hour livestream last week with people from ENS, including AvsA, who spoke for 40 minutes about the service provider program which will be helpful for everyone to check out.

Similar Proposals Question

  • What happens with the proposals that are essentially doing the same thing?
  • Similar proposals are accepted, and all could be funded (it’s up to delegates)
  • Proposals simply need to meet eligibility criteria
  • However, delegates are encouraged to include all who they thing provides great service to the protocol or the DAO

Open Source Requirements

  • Questions about the MIT license and open-sourced codebase.
  • The idea is that this is the work that benefits the ENS ecosystem and is also a public good.
  • Concerns that open-sourcing their proprietary client/apps removes the source for any other funding.
  • Core services can be open source, with peripheral offerings being closed source.
  • The program may fund an open-source SDK, for example, while allowing private repos for other initiatives.
  • The work funded by the program should be MIT licensed, focusing on what is planned to be open-sourced.

Copeland Method and Ranked-choice Voting

  • Snapshot introduced the ranked-choice voting method (see X post)
  • Ranked-choice voting demo from Snapshot.
  • Visualisation is needed for more transparency and insight into how the casted vote would impact the applicants
  • Also, it doesn’t consider eligibility for 2-year streams
    • Agora is building this!

SPP Proposals Deadline

  • March 31, 11:59:59pm
  • Midnight UTC is being considered as a cutoff point.
  • Will post clarifying comment about the exact moment by the time applications need to be submitted.

Delegate meeting (next MetaGov call)

  • Next Tuesday will be the delegate meeting
  • Intended to be like a Delegate forum (all-hands delegate call)
  • The goal is to provide ENS delegates with the necessary information for the upcoming month
  • Question whether we should record the Delegate call
  • Grassroots work will be done this week to reach out to everyone personally to ensure they have the delegate call on their calendar.

What’s next for MetaGov (plans for 2025)

  • Delegate office hours, proposal reviews, and delegate onboarding with calendars are in the works.
  • After SPP, there are plans for the endowment, including auto-funding and more.
  • The Security Council is coming up on its one-year anniversary, and fixing challenges around the number of active delegated votes is a big initiative.
  • Iterating on how the Meta Governance group runs meetings, such as changing the first meeting of the month to a delegate meeting.
  • Regulatory requirements need to be focused on.
  • Actions are being taken to improve coordination in the DAO, such as the delegate all-hands call.
  • The goal is to increase delegation and voter engagement.
  • There are ideas around treasury management, such as the DAO directly staking ETH.
  • Looking back at the one-to-one ENS distribution to grant recipients, those votes are not getting delegated, so a better mechanism is needed.
  • There is research going on in the background on Namechain to understand what the prices should be.
  • And more improvements and experiments

3. Open Discussion

  • /
5 Likes

Agenda and Minutes for MetaGov Meeting, April 1st, 2025 [Delegate Forum]

Details

Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. Upcoming KPK PUR Proposal
  3. Upcoming Events in April
    1. SPP Aplications - Cam
    2. SPP Voting Methodology - Avsa
    3. Upcoming Proposal Schedule
  4. Review our Security Council Test
  5. ENS Delegations and Token Distributions for Term 6
  6. Working Group Process Enhancements
  7. Open Discussion

Details

Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. Upcoming KPK PUR Proposal
  3. Upcoming Events in April
    1. SPP Applications - Cam
    2. SPP Voting Methodology - Avsa
    3. Upcoming Proposal Schedule
  4. Review our Security Council Test
  5. ENS Delegations and Token Distributions for Term 6
  6. Working Group Process Enhancements
  7. Open Discussion

1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )

Karpatkey Endowment Update –

  • ~$75M in assets (32% ETH, 68% stablecoins)
  • APR at 3.3%
  • TWAP below threshold due to ETH price drop
  • Request for transparent fee reporting
  • 99.9% funds allocation: ENS- Yield/Fee Tracking - Google Sheets

2. Upcoming KPK PUR Proposal

  • Discussion around KPK permissions update
  • TWAP handles ETH-to-USDC conversions.
  • Safeguards are in place by having multiple multisigs.
  • Upcoming PUR update to include Zodiac Roles modifier.

3. Upcoming Events in April

  1. SPP Applications - Cam
  2. SPP Voting Methodology - Avsa
  3. Upcoming Proposal Schedule

SPP Applications & Voting Process

  • 25 applications; average request ~$420K.
  • Ranked choice voting (Copeland method).
    • No other DAO is using Copeland.
    • Ranking candidates is a clear method.
  • Agora visualization for transparency.
  • Delegates have expressed confusion about the process.
  • Concern: How to support non-funded projects in the long run.

Voting & Proposal Timeline

  • Two-stage voting:
    • Social votes (similar to service providers, working group funding).
    • Executable votes (fund allocations).

Basic vs. Extended Scope Debate

  • Delegates are unsure how to differentiate.
  • Proposal to vote separately on scopes.
  • Request for a way to differentiate between extended and basic scope.
    • There should be two different options to vote for each service provider.
  • Concern: Splitting votes may impact providers with two scopes.

Delegate Concerns & Adjustments

  • Proposal for providers to update scopes within five days.
  • Proposal for MetaGov Delegates to rework the entire process.
  • Need clearer differentiation between basic & extended scopes.
  • Calls, forum posts, and temp checks planned for feedback.

Funding Strategy & Future Adjustments

  • Ensuring fair distribution (smaller teams vs. large budgets).
  • Concern over “all-or-nothing” funding model.
  • Proposal: Rank providers first, then select preferred scope.

Next Steps

  • Neto to analyze the impact of voting structure changes.
  • Notion for tracking strategy updates.
  • Telegram group for real-time coordination.
  • Future consideration: Separate budgets (2-year extended, 1-year extended, basic)

Read the AI summary/notes (unfiltered, unedited, does not guarantee accuracy, but still good).

2 Likes

Agenda and Minutes for MetaGov Meeting, April 8th, 2025

Details

Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. General DAO Updates Section
    1. Open Space for SPP Discussion
  3. Open Discussion
1 Like

Details

Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. General DAO Updates Section
    1. Open Space for SPP Discussion
  3. Open Discussion

Notes :memo:

1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )

  • The market has been brutal.
  • Portfolio weight: 36% stablecoin, 64% ETH.
  • ETH generated $29k, stablecoins $15k
    • ETH was generating more than stablecoins this week.

  • APR at 3.38%
  • Allocation of funds at 99.99%
  • TWAP has stopped since March 26th because the price broke below $2k
    • Will wait and revisit this topic to find the best time to resume TWAP

2. General DAO Updates

Open Space for SPP Discussion

  • Feedback for the amendment for choosing between basic and extended options.
  • Nick’s comment was discussed that suggested ranking the budget separately, which would simplify the process and align the snapshot vote with current ranking methods, but it would add complications.
  • The current state of interfaces for voting is looking good, a lot of progress is being made, and they feel confident they will deliver.
    • The requirement for strong battle-testing before the official vote is acknowledged.
  • Voting only through Snapshot would be opaque, custom interfaces are much better.
  • A strong desire to move things forward and define next steps is needed
  • Governance takes time, and all conversations are valuable
  • Nick’s proposal has merits, but the current proposal amendments might fail due to Nick’s disagreement with the proposal
  • Token Delegations concerns are pointed out briefly
  • Voting Mechanism and Capital Allocation document by Netto
  • There is a Telegram group where UI providers are helping each other.
  • Excel spreadsheet as a Simulation for vote splitting was shared by Netto.
    • Demonstrating that providers with two budgets are at a disadvantage if budgets are used for ranking.
    • Delegates want to express preference via basic/extended budget, but providers may change to one budget due to the voting mechanism.
  • A suggestion to apply with just one budget has been voiced to mitigate challenges.
  • It’s pointed out that allowing separate voting for extended vs. basic scope leads to vote splitting, incentivizing everyone to propose one budget.
  • James summarizes three options: continue without change, proceed with the original proposal with amendments, or propose removing the basic vs. extended scope.
  • Request to add Brantly’s feedback/suggestion to the existing proposal has been unanimously well-received.
  • Feedback is requested from service providers and delegates regarding their stance on the proposal.
    • It’s important to hear from voters and create a better proposal if needed.
  • Alternative Proposal Suggestion
    • First, rank the projects and then rank the budgets in a second round.
    • There is concern about getting caught up in the granular details of voting mechanics, tho.
  • Priorities: focus on the ideal situation or the most practical solution.
  • Netto’s algorithm explanation should be in all UIs and should be added to the proposal as a reference.
  • Blockful is happy to help other UIs with implementation
  • Decide whether to include specific dates in the proposal
  • Delegates should vote on the UI during the testing period to find bugs and gather data.

3. Open Discussion

  • /
1 Like

Agenda and Minutes for MetaGov Meeting, April 15th, 2025

Details

Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. General DAO Updates Section
    1. Open Space for SPP Discussion
  3. Open Discussion

Details

Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. General DAO Updates Section
    1. Open Space for SPP Discussion
  3. Open Discussion

Notes

1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )

  • Endowment at almost $70M
  • 35% stables and 65% ETH
  • Allocated funds at 99.97%
  • Current APR at 3.35%
  • No updates on TWAPs
  • The report is not available yet on the forum, but it will be soon
  • TWAP still paused
  • 3k ETH left to swap
  • Next week, an extra slide and more details around TWAP

2. General DAO Updates Section

Open Space for SPP Discussion

  • The key to productivity is to focus on the practical differences between the 2 proposals that are active now.
  • Both proposals allow more expressivity for delegates
  • Alex did a demo for voting and budget ranking
    • Vibe coded, shows a list of all the candidates
    • You can drag them up and down to rank them (including their two different budgets)
    • Unranked candidates kept under “none below”.
  • A pre-processing step ensures the basic budget is always above the extended budget to avoid vote splitting.
  • Question about Non-Ranked Projects raised - how are they treated if someone else compares them highly?
  • Proposal 6.4 allows delegates to choose one of two budgets for applicants
  • Proposal 6.5 allows delegates to rank their basic and extended budgets separately
  • In 6.4, extended vs. basic funding is compared against itself, while in 6.5, extra funding competes with all other allocations.
  • A request is made for the voting UI to show the total cost of ranked items.
  • Displaying the total budget is considered important and should be included in the final version.
  • Suggested - showing a running total or single total of votes, with a “none below” option, to help voters understand the program’s scope.
  • Both proposals on the forum have pros and cons, but “they both do the job.”
  • Nick had reservations about the implementation complexity of the new voting scheme.
  • Concerned about potential issues with voting UIs showing different information.
  • Another reason was UX concerns – the inability to rank a company’s basic budget separately from their extended budget.
    • Wants to be able to express preferences more easily.
    • Believes 6.5 is simpler and allows for easier expression of preferences.
  • With 6.4, voting directly on Snapshot was not possible because.
    • Candidates could be ranked, but there was no way to enter a preference for basic or extended budgets.
  • The post-processing in 6.5 is a safety net to ensure that a candidate’s extended budget is not approved without their basic budget also being approved
  • 6.5 is safer if the voter misunderstands something about how the vote works.
    • In 6.4, if someone misunderstands and puts Project A’s extended budget at the top and Project A’s basic budget at the bottom, the basic budget would be ranked at the top next to the extended, ranking that project at the very top.
    • In 6.5, if someone misunderstands and puts extended at the very top and basic at the very bottom, the only result is that they would actually be voting for the basic and then also the extended.
  • The two algorithms have similar trade-offs
  • The main concern is that 6.5 changes the game theory around service provider applications by comparing service providers versus service providers and extended budget versus all other budgets.
  • 6.5 changes too much from 6.3, requiring service providers to change their applications and delegates to understand the new system.
  • Focusing on what produces the best capital allocation outcomes for the DAO.
    • Optimizing capital allocation should be the “North Star.”
  • There’s a concern about delegates needing to rank all candidates, which is a substantial time investment.
    • A separate centralized committee was suggested for next year that would review, approve, and ultimately fund applications and teams (pending discussion when the time is right)
  • Showing the total budget may help delegates prioritize ranking enough candidates for a good outcome.
  • Noted that the rules last year were confusing, and the original rules for this year were even more so.
  • The average delegate may not understand the proposals due to other commitments.
  • Both votes are up, and presumably, whichever one wins will be honored.
  • The discussion is about whether we are voting for teams versus voting for budgets.
  • 6.5 hits a sweet spot by not just voting for budgets but giving some additional granularity.
  • UI Providers are happy to implement either proposal.
  • Adjustments may take a day, but both are simple.

3. Open Discussion

  • /
1 Like

Agenda and Minutes for MetaGov Meeting, April 22nd, 2025

Details

Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. General DAO Updates Section
    1. Open Space for SPP Discussion
  3. Open Discussion

​​Details

Time: Tuesdays at 10:00 am ET (2pm UTC).
Google Meet Link: meet.google.com/bms-grvp-jbw

Stewards:

Agenda

  1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )
  2. General DAO Updates Section
    1. Open Space for SPP Discussion
  3. Open Discussion

Notes :memo:

1. Weekly Endowment Updates (@karpatkey + @Steakhouse )

  • Endowment AUM: $68M
  • Portfolio: 35% ETH and 65% stablecoins
  • No changes to the strategy overview
  • Allocated funds at 99.95%
  • Current APR at 3%
  • TWAP – still paused since ETH price went below $2k

  • Income statement for 2024
  • Domain registrations and renewals make up the operating revenue of $27M.
  • Operating expenses, such as working group expenses, Labs, and the service providers program, add up to around $17M.
  • Operating income was at $10M in 2024 after all Operating Expenses.
  • ENS Steakhouse Dune Dashboard
  • ENS financial reporting by Steakhouse
  • Working on Data Studio for the ENS Endowment Report

  • It will have:
    • Summary of the portfolio, including ETH, stablecoins, and other crypto.
    • Weekly performance summaries.
    • Asset breakdown with charts and tables.
    • Strategy breakdown by type (staking, liquid staking, money markets…)

.ceo and Kartpatkey proposal

  • .ceo redelegation: Transfer ownership of the .ceo top-level domain to the DNSSEC registrar
  • The proposal is going live most likely tomorrow
  • Coordinating with Karpatkey to put up both proposals (.ceo and PUR)
  • Blockful will verify the executable payloads

2. General DAO updates section

2.1. Open Space for SPP Discussion

  • 6.5 proposal passed and will be used as the official voting algorithm for SPP2
  • MetaGov is creating materials to help delegates understand the voting.

  • MetaGov plans to post a forum post with all the information about the dates.
  • Applicants can update their applications.
  • Three key areas to work through:
    • front-end development and testing (led by Netto),
    • the actual vote
    • a period of voting review.
  • The dates will be confirmed in the forum post and the next call.

Testing process

  • A public spreadsheet will manually calculate the results based on the snapshot testing vote.
  • The spreadsheet will be the source of truth for the algorithm and needs to be verified by everyone.
  • Providers’ UIs will be verified against the spreadsheet to ensure they implement the algorithm correctly.
  • A sync is needed between UI providers to understand their implementation progress.
  • UI providers agreed it was a low-effort implementation (1-2 days).
  • Lighthouse is good with the implementation.
    • Minor UI tweaks needed to the voting interface.
  • They need the JSON manifest to be included with all the metadata so they can trustlessly pluck the canonical information and replicate the results
  • Snapshot is capped at 20 unless you pay for the Pro version
  • ENS might need to pay for it for the SPP vote.
  • There will be a JSON manifest.
  • The JSON manifest lists all the choices (basic and extended proposals for each provider) and metadata to group them programmatically.
  • The intention is to have that included with the Snapshot vote to have onchain reference of the values that will be used to calculate the final results.
  • There was a discussion about surfacing how much of a provider’s total budget has been allocated in the UI.
  • The concern is that showing a running total might lead people to stop ordering choices once they hit a certain budget, which could skew the results.

3. Open Discussion

  • /
3 Likes