Draft Author: Erik_Knobl
Introduce a centralized source of truth and a canonical consolidation of our org structure and governance processes via the Developer DAO Operative System
Our current rules, org structure and governance processes are spread across Notion, Forum posts, Snapshot, and community member institutional knowledge. This documentation is not easily accessible, is not internally consistent, and can be lost if experienced members leave the DAO. Without a readily agreed-upon and accessible standard, gaining context of our community architecture is complicated. A governance system that no one understands or that is not succinctly documented is the same as no governance system at all.
The Operative System changes this. It represents a single source of truth compiling previous disparate governance sources. This document aims to be the constitution of our DAO.
A central document named Developer DAO Operative System will be created, containing the single source of truth of all rules, details of all organizational structures, and governance processes of the DAO, updated by Stewards.
This constitution will have a modular structure:
Articles are the main blocks, describing all topics related to a specific topic.
Sections are parts of the Articles, which describe the specifics of the larger topic.
The initial structure will be:
Article 1: Purpose
---------Section 1: Mission
---------Section 2: Vision and Goals
---------Section 3: Values
Article 2: Membership
---------Section 1: Gaining Membership
---------Section 2: Membership Rights
---------Section 3: Membership Obligations
---------Section 4: Code of Conduct
Article 3: Organization
---------Section 1: D_D Foundation ByLaws
---------Section 2: DAO Structure
Article 4: Governance
---------Section 1: $CODE
---------Section 2: DDIP
---------Section 3: Stewards
Article 5: Resources
---------Section 1: Treasury
---------Section 2: Budgets
Articles and Sections can be added, removed and/or modified by using the DDIP process.
We propose also a new DDIP template for making changes to this constitution. It’s specifically oriented towards modularity, and adaption to the Operative System: Operative System DDIP Template.
It’s important to state that by using this format, only the text under the DDIP Specification section will be imported to the Operative System. Only active Stewards will have editing access to the document.
By introducing these ideas we anticipate improvements in precise communication, context, and open discussion. This is the foundation for recursive self-improvement.
This will also impact the quality of onboarding as prospective members will be able to ingest the full scope of the DAOs org and ops in one sitting.
This proposal expects to be voted under the new DDIP rules currently being voted on snapshot.
Thanks for putting this proposal together @Erik_Knobl
I love the idea of a centralised source/reference for the community. I missed the link at the top at first and was thinking, “this should be in Gitbooks” I couldn’t agree more that having a maintained source of truth would be hugely valuable.
It is worth considering delegating authority to change this via DDIP (to Stewards or others) so all changes don’t need Governance. Suspect many DDIPs will end up requiring changes to this doc themselves as well, so I might need to update the existing DDIP proposal to make a note of (Does this Proposal require any changes/updates to this doc).
I referenced “Next steps” in the P-21: Simplifying the Developer DAO Improvement Proposal (DDIP) Process the need to create updated documentation to help folks navigate more quickly and would love to see them living in something like this.
In my head (I confess I haven’t started it yet) this is going to be structured around answering questions; we’d anticipate members asking about Governance i.e.
What is Governance?
How does Governance work at Developer DAO?
How do I get involved in Governance?
How do I create a proposal? etc. etc.
Where possible, use images/diagrams > text, or at least in support of text with and not just a copypasta of the original proposal. The content you’ve suggested here looks excellent. I wonder if there it is worth considering a more user-focused structure to it or what you’re thinking about how this will take shape?
Does this need a true governance proposal? I could potentially see a final document being ratified through governance, but I am not sure this itself needs one and work could simply be started.
good idea, Stewards could be able to edit/add content to make it more helpful to everyone.
I think so, since it proposes a new template for DDIPs. But yeah, work can start now.
@wolovim Any final comments on this proposal?
I think we are ready to move it snapshot.
- love the idea and think its very necessary.
- suggestion: change the name to “Operating System”, in keeping with the developer theme.
- i agree w/ the implied meaning of @willblackburn and @kempsterrrr: i don’t think this needs a snapshot vote and then requiring governance flow to change it. however:
- i do think the duty of updating the document might need specifying (who and when). for example, within the definition of the stewards roles, we might require they update this OS after each successful snapshot proposal.
tl;dr - imo, let’s drop this proposal from governance and just start building the resource.
Haven’t read through the doc yet, but based on the summary provided in the DAO Coordination meeting today — I’m aligned with dropping this from governance, for the sake of efficiency.
I’m also in agreement that we define who should be tasked with updating the doc after each Snapshot proposal has concluded. Without this person being clearly defined, then it won’t get done because people will think that someone else will do it.
Also, in agreement, this doesn’t nee to go through governance, although we may want to pass a simple amendment to the DDIP template once this is finished to add it as a requirement to change.
@Erik_Knobl can we get this moved to the DAO Github?
Who is responsible for updating:
- Give one person the role as part of their role
- Make opening a corresponding PR if you DDIP changes this a requirement of DDIP
I’m in favour of not linking this with governance as everyone else.
@Erik_Knobl, this is on the Steward/Coordination agenda for today. The general sentiment seems to be stopping this proposal as it currently exists. Working on the doc and submitting it as a proposal that includes a small amendment to the DDIP template.
I suggest we, therefor, archive this for now and am happy to work on this with you and then submit a proposal in the future. Are you happy with that?