Context
ENS DAO ratified a $125,000 research retrospective — the ENS DAO Retro & Stakeholder Analysis — and commissioned MetaGov.org to conduct it as an independent party. The DAO selected MetaGov specifically to ensure credible neutrality: no internal politics or self-interested external parties would blur the research’s intent or output.
The mandate set clear boundaries: produce clarity on where the DAO stands and what challenges it faces — not prescribe what it should do next. The community would then use the findings to inform subsequent proposals.
Two structural proposals were introduced on March 18, while the research is still underway. This temp check realigns the sequence with the mandate the DAO set when it commissioned the retro.
The Gap
According to EP 6.28, Phase 3 of the retrospective produces a prioritized, evidence-based set of governance recommendations and a roadmap—composed by MetaGov.
A summary of Phase 3 deliverables is referenced below:
- Synthesize findings into draft recommendations (with rationale, risks, implementation notes)
- Organize them into a near/medium/long-term roadmap with success criteria, and
- Validate with ENS stakeholders before publishing the final report with community-facing summary materials.
However, no formal mechanism currently exists for the DAO to validate and translate those recommendations into co-created reforms before they are submitted to a vote.
This proposal introduces that mechanism.
The Advisory Body Proposal
On March 26, the research team proposed forming a time-bound representative advisory body with four responsibilities, to operate over a two-week window.
The purpose is to provision a legitimate, high-signal venue to facilitate stakeholders as the retrospective moves from findings to implementation.
Below are the responsibilities of said representative body, upon receiving MetaGov’s input:
- Prioritize findings and sequence their implementation for DAO approval.
- Develop an initial Advisory Framework to guide reforms.
- Provide final feedback/requirements for MetaGov’s final research report.
- Present the recommended reform priorities and Advisory Framework to the DAO for a formal vote once the final report is published.
Note: The advisory body is a temporary formation within the existing DAO governance structure. Its purpose is to carry out the responsibilities outlined above and, upon completion, disband unless a subsequent proposal extends its mandate and term limit.
Mandate and Term Limit
The advisory body will meet for a two-week MetaGov-facilitated sprint immediately after formation to:
- Review and provide feedback on the draft recommendations
- Prioritize and sequence those recommendations
After that sprint, the advisory body will recess while MetaGov finalizes the report incorporating its input. Once the final report is delivered, the advisory body reconvenes to present the Advisory Framework and reform priorities for a DAO vote.
Upon submission, the representative advisory body’s purpose shall be considered complete, and it shall be queued for disbandment via formal written notice to the DAO, unless otherwise extended and explicitly specified by a subsequent DAO-approved proposal.
Workplan & Time Commitment
The advisory body should expect roughly a 20% time commitment over the two-week sprint, with an additional commitment at the tail end to submit the Advisory Framework and reform priorities.
MetaGov will facilitate 3–4 synchronous sessions during that period, providing agendas and the tooling needed to capture feedback and prioritization decisions.
Between sessions, the body will maintain an active Telegram (or similar) channel for async coordination as needed.
Composition and Selection Methodology
This body will consist of the following composition, with suggested seat counts in parentheses:
- Current and/or former Working Group Stewards (2)
- Delegates (3)
- ENS Labs (2)
- The MetaGov Research Team (facilitation role)
Within the context of this retrospective, a standard election process is not appropriate, given that two seats are fixed by design (ENS Labs and the MetaGov research team), so a different confirmation path is needed.
This delegation is strictly bounded: the body is temporary, subject to delegate override via Snapshot, and reverts to the status quo if it fails to deliver.
My ask to the community is to allow ENS Labs, with input from the MetaGov research team, to assemble the representative body for this iteration. Contributors like myself acknowledge ENS Labs’ procedural seniority as the entity that created the ENS DAO—and respect that fact—while preserving flexibility for future iterations to evolve based on constituency input.
Therefore, this proposal asks the DAO to adopt an optimistic process whereby any Delegate, within a seven-day window, may propose an alternative advisory body composition via Snapshot. If no counterproposal passes, the original slate proceeds, providing a procedural escape hatch in case of objections.
The full slate will be published for community review and ratification in the formal proposal, and it will be subject to a DAO-wide vote.
Support from Subject-Matter Experts
The representative advisory body may stand up formal input channels to draw on the ‘wisdom of the crowd’ and other technical expertise. These contributors will not carry the responsibilities of the advisory body itself, but their input will inform the body as it carries out its responsibilities.
Relationship to Existing Proposals
This proposal is interdependent with other structural proposals already surfaced. It’s sequenced before the retrospective’s final report, and it presents the reform priorities before any structural proposal goes to a vote. The advisory body therefore acts as a coordination backstop, refining and validating reforms before submission.
Its formal recommendation provides the legitimacy necessary before any structural changes are proposed.
Optimistic Timeline
| Date | Milestone |
|---|---|
| March 31 | Temp Check posted |
| April 7 | Temp Check closes (1 week) |
| April 7 | Social proposal to form the representative advisory body posted |
| April 12 | Snapshot vote closes (5 days) — advisory body formally approved |
| April 12 | Advisory body formation begins |
| April 26 | 2-week intensive concludes — outputs submitted to DAO |
| May 5 | MetaGov final report delivered |
To reiterate, the representative advisory body will formally submit the Advisory Framework and reform priorities for a DAO vote once MetaGov has published its final report.
Understandably, the findings will need time to be circulated and digested by the DAO; therefore, a cooling period is suggested, not extending beyond June 1.
Should the DAO exceed this deadline, it shall fall back to either the current Working Group structure and election cadence (as suggested here) OR any alternative proposal that gains sufficient backing in the form of a social vote.
Next Steps
This temp check gauges community will. If endorsed, a formal proposal follows with a full composition slate and operating mandate.