I don’t feel that this research would be valuable to the ENS DAO at this stage.
While there are a large number of $ENS tokenholders, the DAO is still very much in its infancy. We are in the process of setting up appropriate structures to encourage more active participation in the DAO.
I would like to see research like this in 6-12 months when there is more meaningful feedback and data to collect. An analysis of community health of the DAO at this stage seems to be very premature.
Can we get a TL;DR of the proposal? The summary is basically a title.
What kind of bespoke tools do you have in mind building? There are already many tools and services are available so I suggest you research existing tools first and suggest what date is missing that needs building.
Do you have an example in mind of such a tool?
I agree with the timing argument. 6 months from now would be ideal.
As @noturhandle mentioned, DeepDAO already gives great insight.
Also if the data is on-chain , you can create lots of dashboard using Dune unless you are solely relying the data based from surveys.
I think the tools referred to in the post are not analytics tools (e.g. DeepDAO) but rather the survey tools. In other words, this ‘analytics’ is trying to sample the social spectrum, not the number spectrum. It is impossible to avoid overlaps though. I also think Flipside Crypto has the likelihood of being more useful than DeepDAO since we can custom request all we want from their CEA workstream.
Thanks for the responses, everyone. I’ll answer each in turn below:
Can your proposal include fast-tracking of at least one quantitative survey before, say June 27?
Hey @inplco, thanks for the detailed response. I missed the DAOist event, so I may have missed you, unfortunately. Daniel says hey 
Ideally, we’d spend the initial 6 weeks evaluating options and implementations. Fast-tracking development of a single solution to meet a June 27 deadline will likely distort the value of the initial research. We’re open to collaborating with you to draft the survey and evaluate any existing tools in those initial weeks.
Your current proposal targets P2B systems where individual contributors play the majority role; you might have to rethink on this a little bit to align yourself with the additional B2B nature of ENS.
Great point. We’ve given this some thought and agree that, at least in this initial phase, we’d be unable to extend the research to include the entire ENS ecosystem, including ENS’ partner communities and satellite communities. That being said, our goal is to ensure our research informs future development of community health analytics tools and we’d aim to capture the problem in our work. We’d suggest basing the research on the elements of ENS that are P2B, and taking a sample-based approach with a few communities across the ecosystem. Once, we’re confident we have an approach that works, we can expand the scope to include B2B relationships.
An analysis of community health of the DAO at this stage seems to be very premature.
Hey @alisha.eth, thanks for responding so quickly and honestly.
While the DAO is undeniably in its infancy, this is an opportune time to begin monitoring health. If the research was complete today, I’m confident it would prove itself a useful aid when evaluating the structures most appropriate for increasing active participation in ENS DAO.
Notably, the project’s purpose is to contribute to DAO collective knowledge around the problem of community health through joint research. Therefore, while you may argue that the value to ENS of a single round of analytics around community health offers limited immediate utility to ENS DAO, funding the research and contributing ENS’s unique problem-set today informs the roadmaps of a number of future products, improves the experience for current and future contributors and members, and lowers the administrative overhead for community managers across the ecosystem. Additionally, any findings will also directly serve to inform ENS’s evolution as a DAO.
Can we get a TL;DR of the proposal? The summary is basically a title.
@neiman You’re right 
I’ll update the summary now. Let me know if it’s an improvement.
What kind of bespoke tools do you have in mind building? There are already many tools and services are available so I suggest you research existing tools first and suggest what date is missing that needs building.
Hey @matoken.eth. I agree, there are lots of tools available for analysis of on-chain data. @inplco puts it well—we’re interested in the health of social connectivity within the community.
As an example, you can imagine a survey bot connected to a dashboard that a community manager or steward uses to issue Pulse Surveys to members. They can then cross-reference the results with Organizational Network Analysis.
You should add a poll to the post with the title
and options
You can add the poll through the settings icon in the draft window. This will act as an informal pulse check.
I am convinced that we should fund this proposal now. I will add my comments and reasons on the poll.
From what I understand of your initial post you’re proposing to do only pulse surveys apart from ONA? That’s something we never do at work, we’d use pulse surveys in conjunction with other surveys only to avoid the common issue of there being too many long surveys.
Each survey takes quite a long time to draft as well, as it’s tailored for each client. The idea of a semi-generalized pulse survey bot seems like a minor nightmare to me.
You’d need to do several different types of surveys in order to survey well, and I think that designing those surveys well would take a longer time than simply asking people at this point. We’re simply not that many people regularly active in the DAO yet, certainly not enough to warrant the use of ONA or even to produce meaningful results using it.
I think that a good start would rather be more basic and easily attainable metrics while the DAO is young, and then review and adopt more advanced (and costly) analytics methods as the DAO grows and the need for specific data increases as more complex problems present themselves.
Hi @inplco,
I’ll add a poll now but I suggest we remove the “in 6 months” option as participation in the research project won’t be an option.
Are you happy for me to proceed on that basis?
Yes, please go ahead with ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ options.
Hi @cthulu.eth, thanks for responding and congrats on the ENS name.
The research will leverage pulse surveys, ONA, and other techniques to provide insights to ENS about its community health. We’re not constrained to the techniques mentioned in the proposal.
Each survey takes quite a long time to draft as well, as it’s tailored for each client. The idea of a semi-generalized pulse survey bot seems like a minor nightmare to me.
You’d need to do several different types of surveys in order to survey well, and I think that designing those surveys well would take a longer time than simply asking people at this point. We’re simply not that many people regularly active in the DAO yet, certainly not enough to warrant the use of ONA or even to produce meaningful results using it.
This is the problem statement we’re tackling. It’s currently not clear which approach will work for DAOs and, ideally, we can identify which of the available solutions makes an acceptable trade off between effort and reward on behalf of DAOs and their community managers.
However, the goal here is to determine the best technique to analyze community health in real-time, not simply the output of the initial surveys conducted during our research.
Poll added
Thanks for the clarification, that sounds fair enough. I was afraid at first that we’d just be flooded with pulse surveys 
I have voted ‘YES’ on the proposal after discussions in this thread.
Considering that the research work itself will take 10 weeks (theoretically 
; reality is always longer) and it will take another 4 weeks for the proposal to pass and such, I believe the results of this proposal will be available right in time for elections for Q1/2 2023. It is time ENS DAO funded a proposal with conviction.
We also need immediate help in designing very good surveys for upcoming elections in 15 days, if possible. I will personally push for it to make it happen despite time being very short.
Independent of the research led by RnDAO, A&R subWG will be working on ungameable models for delegate and steward reputation and impact in Q3/4. RnDAO’s work will add to that workstream through their surveys. We need this starting next term to have a consistent report of the entire term by Dec 2022. This cannot wait until end of year.
Have you spoke to Coordinape guys? They do have some sort of network mapping. Maybe you can use their tool for cross valuation and focus on analysis so that you don’t have to build the whole toolset. IMHO, the network graph looks fancy but doesn’t really give much insight to what you can do with the data. Do you have any example case you are going to use as an aspiration?
@noturhandle @danielo Could someone from your team signup for this call? It’ll be very helpful if RnDAO can join this 30min introduction to the subWG
Thanks for the invite. One of us will be there.
Since this proposal isn’t going in RnDAOs direction by a big and clear margin (2-9), I’ll encourage you to engage with the community and explicitly ask people what their concerns are. I am guessing the main concern is the timing of the research work and most people think that this is too early to draw samples. That is fair assessment. In the true spirit of the DAO, you now have to engage in a dialogue.
Alternatively, you can draft a custom research proposal for ENS (and ENS only) which will be much more contained and specific to the current state of ENS DAO; I expect that such a proposal will require significantly less funds, less manpower & time from RnDAO and should provide the ENS DAO with actionable surveys right away (for upcoming elections, for instance).
