I don’t believe the working groups should treat the Retro period as “business as usual”.
Looking at the two intervention proposals, 6.25 & 6.26, over 75% of the total votes supported at least one of the two DAO interventions. Only about 25% of voting power voted to support the status quo by voting against both proposals.
And since the winning proposal specifically invests resources to evaluate the DAO’s spending, it seems prudent to wait for the outcome of that initiative before funding the working groups with this 1 million USDC. The retro concludes in 2.5 months, at the end of March 2026.
The original social proposals to confirm the working group spending were posted weeks before the two intervention proposals and their associated discussions.
I’d like to see the sitting stewards use an essentials-only spending plan and focus inward during the retro period, in hopes that we can help come up with a new, more robust structure for the Working Groups.
There was a disagreement inside the Meta-Governance working group on this, but I’ll let my two fellow stewards share their own thoughts. All stewards should weigh in here, but while stewards supporting funding their working groups is good for discussion, more importantly would be delegates who are not stewards to chime in with their thoughts.
@Meta-Gov_Stewards @Ecosystem_Stewards @PublicGoods_Stewards