Thanks for the clarification — I think it makes sense for the SPP chair to sit on the n/4 multisig to strengthen procedural neutrality re: funds custody.
[6.42] [Social] SPP3: Program Authorization and Committee Model states that:
“Funds are transferred to the accountability body’s multisig upon cohort ratification and disbursed to providers via stream from there.”
And
“The accountability body refers to the body the DAO designates as the SPP3 accountability counterparty. At the time of this proposal, that body is the Meta-Governance Working Group”
So in practice, the accountability body would presumably deploy that Safe, seat the relevant signers, and configure the ZRM clawback mechanism.
Am I right to infer that the accountability body would configure the ZRM on setup?
And if so, what exact powers would the DAO have through it, and who could later amend or revoke that configuration?