For the last couple of weeks, a group of smart people and I have been working on what would eventually become a MIP set that, we believe, is the right way for Maker to move forward, as the Foundation dissolves and the responsibilities are taken over by the Community. The first step is to lay down the roadmap to facilitate this transition.
As we take another step towards decentralization, we have begun implementing temporary solutions to deal with situations where the Foundation cannot meet Governance’s requirements.
Several Contributors and Facilitators have voiced their concerns to achieve autonomy and flexibility, while Community members search for ways to collaborate.
What’s more, the DAO could benefit from top-talent that the Foundation has spent years hiring and training.
We don’t believe it is entirely possible to achieve the Target Operating Model in the first iteration. The MIPs model allows us to discover the shortcomings of the current MIP Set, amend it, and integrate the temporary measures built around its weaknesses.
Simplicity and modularity have driven this MIP Set. The main idea behind it is to keep the basic framework flexible so that the Community can use it in multiple situations in an unbiased way. As we learn to self-organize, we will be able to upgrade the Framework to adjust upcoming needs.
Core Objective of the Framework
For the DAO to grow its value and keep running its services, it needs to make sure that its available resources find their way towards the contributors able to perform certain activities.
This Framework aims to help organize both the flow of priorities and resources, not only enticing as much talent as possible to cross the chasm (from the Foundation to the DAO), but also to attract top talent from the broader DeFi talent pool.
The Core Unit
It contains a Mandate, akin to a question that the Facilitator must answer with the available resources.
One or multiple budgets per Core Unit; each with its implementation and its breakdown.
The most trusted actor in the Community; interacts with Governance and the Contributors to organize activities to achieve the Objectives. It contains the name and information and the commitment (the how).
The groups of people performing the tasks to maintain and grow the protocol can focus on their job while the Facilitator acts as a proxy and deals with the bureaucracy of interacting with Maker Governance.
Trust, rather than control
Governance is not looking to micromanage any given group. Arguably most MKR holders prefer a relatively hands-off approach and to be consulted in critical decisions (potentially contentious).
The Framework provides Core Unit Facilitators with enough flexibility and margin to quickly react to new events. In return, they’re expected to provide clarity into their actions and expenditures.
While Governance has methods to remove a Core Unit Facilitator (non-performing, rogue, etc.), these agents need to receive the corresponding remuneration and enough trust and autonomy upfront to perform well.
MIP Set Proposed
- MIP38: DAO Primitives State
- MIP39: Core Unit Framework
- MIP40: Budget Framework
- MIP41: Facilitator Framework
Existing MIPs Impacted by the Set Proposed
- MIP4c2-SP10: MIP0 Amendments
- MIP4c2-SP11: MIP5 Amendments
- MIP4c2-SP12: MIP16 Amendments
Moving Forward - How can you help
RFC - Improving this Framework
Reply to this proposal. If you think that there’s something we should consider, please comment. We will do our best to try to accommodate every situation.
Using this Framework
Propose a Core Unit. It needs a name and a mandate.
Ideally that Core Unit also comes with a Budget (implementation + breakdown), and a Faciliator and their commitment.