I’m a DAO governance researcher working across multiple ecosystems, and I’ve been exploring how ENS positions itself as a naming public good versus how the ENS governance forum is scoped.
Today, .eth is used by a very large number of projects and users across the broader Ethereum ecosystem, far beyond ENS Labs and ENS DAO itself. Yet, the ENS governance forum is intentionally focused on ENS DAO governance and ENS‑aligned ecosystem topics (DAO-wide, Meta‑Governance, ENS Ecosystem, etc.).
My question is: are we under‑utilising .eth’s footprint at the governance layer? In other words, should the ENS forum (or a dedicated sub‑environment) more actively invite and curate discussions from .eth‑using projects and DAOs that rely on ENS as core infra, instead of keeping the forum narrowly ENS‑internal?
I’m not suggesting that the ENS forum becomes a general “Ethereum everything” hub. Rather, I’m wondering whether there is room for:
– A curated “.eth projects / ENS‑reliant DAOs” track under ENS Ecosystem.
– A directory or recurring thread that surfaces projects deeply integrated with ENS, so that governance, risk, and coordination questions around naming can be discussed in one place.
From a governance‑risk perspective, the current temp‑check about redefining DAO vs Foundation roles shows ENS is already thinking about scope, accountability, and coordination trade‑offs. This feels like a good moment to also ask whether ENS wants to be more intentional about convening .eth‑based projects around its governance surface.
I’d be very interested to hear from stewards, long‑time contributors, and other delegates on whether this has been discussed before, and what constraints or past decisions shaped the current forum scope.