CoCC - Season 6 Retrospective
1. What is your assessment of the impact KPIs that were set in your Budget Proposal at the start of the Season?
- Have you made progress towards, or achieved, these milestones or KPIs?
- If not, why?
Reporter Experience KPIs:
- Response time and response rate on filed reports: respecting the season 6 council charter, a maximum of 5 labor days has been the rule for the council to identify and propose solutions to the cases that have appeared. Faster responses have happened with cases of severe violations to the rules of engagement.
- Number of reports that de-escalated without enforcement actions: 3
- Number of reports with enforcement actions: 1
- Number of cases referred to mediation: 1
- Accountability and transparency around the due processing of cases with recurrent posting on the forum:
Threads for this purpose: Accountability reports S6, CoCC communication thread & this retrospective post. - Number of updates to charters and operating procedures to match the functionality of the council to the evolving seasonal nature of Optimism: 1 Update to the council charter, giving more clarity to the boundaries and scope of sanctions that can be enforced by the CoCC.
- Availability and ease of access to the council with monthly office hours where the community can raise or get information on cases processed: By the end of this season the CoCC delivers 4 public office hours, regular private weekly council meetings and some CFC meetings with participation of the council’s lead.
Performance KPIs:
- Number of community members that disengage/resign/offboard due to unmanaged conflict: From the council’s perspective, no community members have disengaged due to unmanaged conflict in season 6. Parties involved in cases have continued contributing to the collective, and only sanctioned members have been kept aside as a measure to protect the community and the boundaries for engagement.
- None, or least amount of token votes regarding Conflict management actions related to implementing rules of engagement: There was no additional voting overhead created from the code of conduct council duties. There was one snapshot vote that created governance overhead in the collective, but it was not related to the competencies of this council.
- Separate the collective from the visibility of conflicts managed, and their outcomes: We have ensured due diligence and confidentiality for the cases, successfully protecting the perceived wellbeing of the community and removing governance overhead from foundation and other participants.
- Mid and end-season analysis from the council about patterns identified in cases, to signal improvement opportunities: Mid season report already shared in the forum, and end of season report to be posted before 28th nov, at the “CoCC accountability reports S6” thread
Individual ideas From members:
Juan’s take: Yes. This season we’ve contributed to the wellbeing of the collective by managing the load from conflicting situations. We think that we could have made more impact in the community with preventive measures and education towards the desired types of interactions.
Alex’s take: Yes, we have made progress towards the notion of de-escalating without enforcement actions while replacing the Foundation in the processing of reported Code of Conduct Violations.
Pumbi’s take: Yes, we have worked on achieving all the KPIs proposed at the beginning of the season. We provided support to all parties where conflict situations arose and effectively removed this workload from the Foundation.
Fuji’s take: Yes, we have made meaningful progress against the KPIs outlined at the start of the season. Our team has actively managed various conflicts, provided support to collectives and contributed to a more positive community experience. By addressing conflicts and taking on roles previously managed by the Foundation, we have helped shift the workload, resulting in more purposeful enforcement of the Code of Conduct within the group. While we have effectively achieved our conflict resolution goals, there is an opportunity to further strengthen proactive engagement through prevention education and clearer communication of expected behavior.
CryptoReuMD’s take: Yes, our goal was to ensure timely responses and make the language of forms and communication kinder and more accessible for vulnerable members submitting reports. We aimed to respond cohesively as a team, working together as one interconnected network to meet deadlines and milestones effectively.
Oxytocin’s take: Based on the KPIs established, this season the Council has accomplished what was set. Focussing on the experience for the token house, the Council has been able to successfully de-escalate conflicts which I believe could have ended up in a strong forum escalation were we not present to offer a solution. Additionally, the appropriate communication and responses were drafted on time, allowing for transparency for the delegates who have elected us.
2. Impact assessment - how well did your team’s outputs support the Intent they were authorized under?
Juan’s take: Our work is key to achieve the desired governance decentralization in the collective. Every member of this season’s council has been really professional and committed to their required duties of being a sensory node to the collective, opening paths to listen and process behavioral episodes without creating governance overhead.
Alex’s take: I think we are on the right track, but changes are definitely required in the domain of this council. The outputs are relatively neutral, since several of the cases were simply outside our scope.
Fuji’s take: We are working to improve transparency and accountability through updates to the IOP process and a more inclusive report form. We also handle reports from the community. These actions support the CoCC’s goal of strengthening collective value and increasing community trust.
Pumbi’s take: The general feeling of the members of this Council is that by having a broader scope of action we would have achieved a more tangible impact on the Collective. We feel that the CoCC is currently dependent on other structures and cannot exercise or reinforce decisions autonomously without the intervention of other parties.
CryptoReuMD’s take: This council season has shown us the importance of evolving our governance framework to meet the Collective’s growing needs. While we’ve made significant strides in decentralizing decision-making and ensuring each council member serves as a crucial point, there’s still room to amplify our impact. Expanding our scope would allow for more decisive action, strengthening our shared vision by balancing autonomy with transparency and accountability.
Oxytocin’s take: The team was able to do everything within their new scope established this season, with the key term in this question being ‘authorized’ . We were able to fully accomplish everything with the tools being given, but in some cases, we would receive reports that we were not authorised to act upon, which while frustrating should not be counted towards the final impact.
3. What are the major problems you ran into over the course of the Season?
Juan’s take: The perception of the CoCC as only a punitive body, and not so much of a group that can intentionally support the awareness and embodiment of the collective values inside the rules of engagement and the code of conduct.
Alex’s take: I think a big problem is receiving reports from third parties expecting us to act on something that is out of our control (which is frustrating for both parties).
Fuji’s take: There are limitations on the CoCC’s authority to deal with issues that occur outside of the our platform, as seen in the reports on the Oekaki and Base communities. I think we can benefit from getting more community feedback about the perception of the CoCC’s duty in regards to neutrality and visibility.
Pumbi’s take: Basically the limitation in our field of action. People come to us looking for a concrete solution to a problem that arises and in most cases the situation is out of our scope and our hands are tied.
CryptoReuMD’s take: This is a very interesting question. I feel that we have high walls around our boundaries that prevent us from reaching and helping people effectively. Perhaps having a more private or encrypted way of communicating with the community could help decentralize our response process.
Oxytocin’s take: I do not want to repeat what my colleagues have expressed, so instead of covering the lack of scope of action covered before, another major problem has been the lack of cohesive communication with other bodies of the token house.
As elected members of only the Token house , our scope might always be limited, but I found that even within the Token House our interdepartmental coordination could have been improved. Luckily, the reports that were related to governing bodies were limited this season, but I felt that if a situation were to arise, we could have acted much quicker if these connections were pre-established.
4. What are possible solutions that could be explored next Season?
Juan’s take: I would love to see the CoCC more involved in educational efforts towards the embodiment of the collective values. This season there was an RFP that included some cultural education sessions, and the community did not receive them because the third party didn’t deliver fully the RFP. I think the collective should not miss this important aspect because of grants not being delivered fully.
Alex’s take: Turn the Council into a general reporting service (one-stop shop for complaints) and, instead of giving decision-making power, provide admin people and communication channels to quickly contact whoever is necessary (and close the ticket until the case is processed by the actor in question).
Pumbi’s take: That the CoCC has more authority to be able to exercise actions, as an example: the Lead should have permissions in the forum to hide a post and not dep end on the availability of a govNERD for this task. In short, more freedom of action.
Fuji’s take: Developing more resources or checklists for team members to follow in handling standard cases can help us maintain consistency and ensure that actions taken are aligned with the Code of Conduct.
CryptoReuMD’s take: I believe that the sensory nodes we’ve established should interconnect between sessions, as the learning process delays the group’s actionability. Being a council member it’s a great honor, but we also need to work for the people that it’s outside and doesn’t have timing or season reflection periods.
Oxytocin: As we are only empowered by the votes given by the Token House, I am not sure we can resolve the lack of authority for some actions. Instead , I feel there are two actions that might be worth exploring this season.
Firstly, it might be worth exploring a renaming of the Code of Conduct council. The current name might suggest to outsiders that the scope extends much beyond our reach, and perhaps we should consider a term that makes it clear from the onset what our mission and abilities are. We would receive reports from private campaigns and discord servers that were optimism related, but realistically we could not exert any action upon. Perhaps something like the Governance Accountability Commission could convey a clearer meaning?
Additionally, I believe deeper connection with other bodies of the Council could be beneficial. For instance, each council member could be assigned as a point of contact for some of the governance bodies (eg. Anti-capture commission, Grants Councils. etc), which would facilitate both the ability of asking clarifications from these bodies, as well as serve as a confidant were these institutions to have problems worth reporting as well.
5. What improvements to the team’s mandate would you suggest for next Season?
Juan’s take:
- Having feedback forms for the community to review the council’s perception of impact.
- Include CoCC contributions for governance retro funding rounds, same as of other councils of the collective.
- Giving the CoCC lead platform admin capacities to enforce the sanctions described in the rules of engagement.
- Support and follow up execution of proactive actions towards education and embodiment of collective values
Alex’s take: I think we need broader and deeper spaces for conversation, especially if we want to take on initiatives beyond the analysis of reports.
Fuji’s take: We suggest that the CoCC has a clearer process to strengthen the involvement of third parties, as arbiters of complex conflicts. Improvements incoordination across platforms and authorities will support the CoCC’s role in fostering harmonious communities in the future.
Pumbi’s take: Modifying the scope is definitely an almost mandatory point to take into account. In my opinion the CoCC is a very valuable structure, but today it is not being used in the best way and we assume that the general opinion of the Collective is that “this council is not as important as other structures or does not generate a real impact”.
CryptoReuMD take: Tooling, in this season we started using token gated access to documents, also we are using google meet for sessions and communication via email, and im sure that we can also make some sessions and create applications for the COCC.
Oxytocin: As can be implied from my last answer, I believe that the conceptual mandate of the council is important, but requires a subtle honing to make it more intuitive. Placing greater emphasis on governance accountability for the rules of engagement would still allow us to act on rules of engagement and severe violations, but without the implied need of, for example, enforcing behavior from other chains or initiatives that are optimism-related but not enforceable by us.
Finally, while we have built a very strong procedure for outside reports, the council could also have a more proactive role by actively looking out for the wellbeing of other representatives of the collective.
6. (optional) If you don’t believe the team’s operations should continue next Season, please explain why here.
We think that the code of conduct council is an important representative structure in the Optimism collective, since it decentralizes the monitoring and enforcement of the rules of engagement from the foundation, to the community, along with the autonomy and credibly neutrality that comes from electing and monitoring its members seasonally. That is why we encourage the continuity of this council for future seasons.
Thanks @Pumbi @alexsotodigital @Oxytocin @CryptoReuMD @fujiar @juankbell for contributing to the season 6 Code of conduct council in the Optimism collective 