Sorry for not posting @clowes.eth earlier as I’ve been pretty swamped. I think this proposal is one of the most meaningful proposals I’ve seen that properly considers the findings of the retro and makes a meaningful attempt to drive change vs going for a well known frankly broken system.
I think this level of detail is actually needed if we want to deliver change.
Rational below in supporting docs:
I previously outlined my core understanding of the retro’s findings and documented them here. (Also explained them on the forum here).
With that as my baseline, I have now mapped each new “working group proposal” to the empirical reforms presented from the retro to better understand how each proposal moves the needle.
Proposal keys used in the next spreadsheet:
- CL, Coordination Layer
- WGR, Working Group Restructure
- PF, Path forward on Working Group elections for Term 7
- AP, Replace the Working Groups with the ENS Admin Panel
While this proposal does not produce some of the docs (as with most of the current proposals), I think the matrix shows it it makes the largest dent.