Some thoughts about HIP-7 and why i’m agree with hip75. To be honest, I appeared here after the board became effective… So please, i’m open to hear what others have to say too.
Technical implementation of voting.
We can consider the changes needed for quadratic voting implementation. In that case, only Santi & Clement had the power to enable it.
Access to critical wallets.
Jean and Valen has no access to the gitcoin multisig wallet. Clement need to leave his signature too.
Access right to funds by management
I don’t understand the difference between the previous and this one. But i think it’s the same outcome.
Payment to employees.
We have no employees and no plans to have either.
Any resource requiring high trust by the community.
Snapshot administrators are only santi and clement. Again, Jean & Valen has no access and clement should leave his place.
I don’t know who manage this forum itself either, can anyone confirm?
In addition, the board will
Advise management, administer their payment, and monitor their performance.
Adjudicate if the proper procedure is followed on passing proposals.
I’ve been going over some problems with this myself. Some proposals were no hip5 complaint and had a high risk to be challenged in the governor, but no mbm worried too much
To be fair, the mission board ratification was a case of success. But it’s the only one.
Be authorized to issue mission statements on behalf of the DAO.
I don’t know if something like this happen .
Leaving hip7 aside, I understand that one of the important concern was to hire a solid team to lead the protocol. It never happen.
So, I prefer that we remove this political role. We do trust now in people who are not in a mission board seat, so I see no difference if the board is not here anymore. Then, we could establish new roles only for what it’s needed (snapshot / forum / small multisig treasury / etc)