As discussed on the previous DAO community call, this PRE-GIP focuses on decentralising the workflow as well. While the process is new, the below article by Ivan discusses in detail how the DAO could approach this. Please go through the article and suggest methods of improvements, additions, possible concerns or if you feel it’s not a feasible model, please go ahead and let us know why and help improve.
Article Link:
Please post your inputs below as we move towards decentralising DAO initiatives
okay had a chance to properly review this and I have a couple Q’s:
The community would be voting on a specific goal and a budget for that goal (initiative + grant), how does the DAO then go about selecting the group to fulfill that grant-initiative?
Would all grant-initiatives go through the GIP life cycle?
The community would be voting on a specific goal and a budget for that goal (initiative + grant), how does the DAO then go about selecting the group to fulfill that grant-initiative?
At first is a bit harder given there is no real competition of initiatives for each strategy, so the new topic proposal addresses this: for now most are the same multiplier system, slowly moving to grant-based payouts. Then yes, market forces should take over as and if this grows.
Would all grant-initiatives go through the GIP life cycle?
Eventually yes, but maybe some more “permanent things” can stay as is unless voted out. So while other initiatives need to rotate, tweeting can’t simply be taken out - so that and some dev docs / community support - can roll over. Other initiatives need to be all strict with reporting.
