GM
I’ve voted For these proposals.
- Security Council Operating Budget
- Sequencer ETH Management: 12-Month Renewal and Treasury Optimization
- Developer Advisory Board Dissolution Proposal
- Operating Manual Update Proposal
- Grants Council Dissolution Proposal
- Milestones and Metrics Council Dissolution Proposal
Feedback
I agree with simplifying governance where the overhead outweighs the benefits. The rationale presented by the @system Foundation is thoughtful, and I believe this evolution reflects important lessons from the past few years.
My main concern is not the dissolution of these structures, but the absence of a clear path for the people who built them. If the organization is evolving, how does the talent, context, and trust accumulated through years of community participation evolve with it, rather than being left behind?
More broadly, if governance’s role becomes holding the Foundation accountable while the Foundation executes, how can delegates and the broader community continue to provide meaningful oversight? Accountability works best when there are enough opportunities to understand the reasoning behind important decisions, not only their outcomes.
I wonder whether there are lightweight practices from the DAO that could still strengthen this new model without slowing execution.
Things like:
- occasional design workshops with delegates and builders,
- postmortems on significant decisions,
- open strategy sessions on selected topics.
All that could preserve valuable community context while keeping the organization lean.
Overall, I support the direction. My hope is simply that, as we move from experimentation to organization, we also find ways to carry forward the strengths of both worlds. A “new type of organization - not a DAO and not a corporation - but something new”, right?