HIP-X: Mission Board responsabilities

The 21st of May 2022 starts the begining of the Mission Board elections. Before that date we can discuss the responsabilities of the MB members with what we have learned in the last year. Ideally, we can create a HIP and approve it by the 21st of May but it’s possible that we are not able to do it. In any case, to respect the democratic process we shouldn’t delay the elections.

This discussion can be divided in two parts.

  • First: agree on a single sentence that defines the mission of the project (as close as possible)

  • Second: Adjust Mission Board memebers responsabilities, power and tasks based on “making what’s necessary to fulfill the mission”. Based on this discussion we can create a HIP, which will continue the work of HIP-7 and HIP-21

So, what’s the mission of PoH? Once we agree more or less on this, we can discuss the responsabilities of the MB. I’ve heard a few times the mission is:

“onboard the max number of people to PoH”

In my opinion this is very narrow in perspective, if we take it to an extreme situation, imagine every person on the planet is on PoH but there’s absolutely no use case. See where I’m going? Maybe The mission should be something like:

“Being the standard identity protocol for web3 apps”

This is just the first thing that came to my mind, I think we can do better.

4 Likes

First: What I believe to be the mission of Proof of Humanity is not just to be the largest identity system but a sybil-proof one that’s integrable to other web3 apps needing an advanced registry for humans online i.e. universal identifier, reputation, quadratic voting etc. (can’t suggest a one-liner yet)

Second: Instead of creating an HIP adding roles to the Mission Board, how about an HIP that formally opens another branch of role in the DAO say Operations - a hired team that can start with a Project Manager and Developer who are accountable to PoH and UBI DAO

2 Likes

I agree with your thoughts on the mission, I’ve been thinking how to express them on a few lines but can’t come up with anything.

About the HIPs, I think we could do both. Hiring someone is really necessary for the DAO right now. And stablishing the MB members responsability would continue the work of HIP-7 and HIP-21.

@NingFid: I think it is a good idea to split the responsibilities of the MB up. I see three separate current responsibilities which really could be handled by separate people.

  1. Voting - Ensure that HIPs are followed and interpret them in case they are not clear or something is missing.
  2. Vision - Issue (or approve) normative official documents about the direction of the project and what it is trying to achieve (ideally compiling the opinions of the community).
  3. Money. Transfer (or issue a transfer order through Govenor) to make money available to the Project Manager and pay out according to the decisions made in HIPs.
  4. Operations - Handle the practical concerns of interviewing, creating a hiring process leading to a hiring HIP (DAO must approve final hiring) and supervising/evaluating the hired people. I would invite the PM to attend meetings but keep them from having voting rights on such a board.

My proposal would be a split of “Mission Board” (1+2+3) and “Operations Board” (4), since the last may be a very time-consuming responsibility.

The fact that we do not have an actual, working mission board makes us discuss about these kinds of things, while at the same time we have other, much bigger and impactful issues to deal with (such as hiring procedures and hip proposal frameworks). My suggestion would be to tackle those first while we continue debating about the situation regarding the responsabilities of the MB (which I think they are already very well described in the HIPs written by you, Mads).