Thanks for putting this together @Limes. Some thoughts:
DAO Wallet vs Timelock terminology
Since I already heard some folks getting confused in understanding the DAO wallet was actually the timelock, I wonder if timelock.ensdao.eth is a more precise name since it’s the technical term.
Naming the security council contracts
veto.ensdao.eth is a contract that has no delegations anymore. Though it could be used in the future.
This contract and this multisig (aka Security Council) is effectively what’s now protecting the DAO. Both don’t require a DAO vote, since one is a multisig and the other inherited the ReverseClaimer contract.
Happy to join the initiative and take the lead for those contracts. My suggestion is:
- securitycouncil.ensdao.eth → 0xB8fA0cE3f91F41C5292D07475b445c35ddF63eE0
- multisig.securitycouncil.ensdao.eth → 0xaA5cD05f6B62C3af58AE9c4F3F7A2aCC2Cdc2Cc7
Ownership of domains
This is a tangential topic that came in mind since we are talking about ens/ensdao.eth subdomains.
Back in Jan 2024, because of DAOIP-6, I did a quick research on how DAOs were using ENS.
Here is the spreadsheet. The data isn’t update since then, but I double checked the ENS one and still the same. It might also have some relevant data for the Naming Season proposal and the Organizational Metadata work.
One of the things that caught my eye is the owner and manager role of domains. The majority of listed DAOs owns their domains through a multisig or even the timelock contract, while managing it on an easier access address (like a multisig or EOA).
ens.eth and ensdao.eth are managed and owned by an EOA. The best practice for security and to guarantee this is a DAO owned asset would be the ens.eth and/or at least ensdao.eth to be owned by the timelock/working group multisig, while the manager role could remain as its. By doing this, we are also setting an example.
Looking forward to see this live and name them all!! 