CIP-187: City Hall was proposing more than just buying a property - it was proposing a new collective project and sense purpose and for the DAO. While it wasn’t perfect, City Hall represented Lyons and my best attempt to chart a course for us. Now that it has been rejected in Snapshot, I fear that we lack something to build towards and won’t do anything remarkable.
I wanted to open up a thread for feedback on:
Is there a version of City Hall that folks (especially international community members) would support?
Is there a different direction that people would like to see the DAO go?
As one of the most widely decentralized DAOs, we are uniquely challenged with getting a large degree of alignment from members around the world. I welcome any feedback on how to move forward from here.
My primary concern regarding CIP-187 was the underlying business model. It’s noted that the figures provided are hypothetical and contingent on the DAO executing the outlined activities. However, for significant decisions, especially involving a substantial portion of our treasury, it’s essential to base our assumptions on concrete data and market analysis. Do we have verified insights into whether Denver needs more of the proposed offerings? And are the projected numbers realistic? My hesitation stems from the need for more comprehensive information to confidently support such a significant financial commitment.
My concern (though I voted for the project) was stated on the initial draft, which is that having two people and an undeclared third person as the multisig for $1.6 million without clear accountability was dangerous. I did vote for it, so it’s not that I didn’t trust the two people who were proposed, but the “temp check” that would move the project from $100K to $1.6 mil was not clearly outlined, and thus it felt like it would probably pass since there wasn’t clarity on what it would mean to fail at that point.
I think a proposal asking for funds that would almost drain the entire treasury right away almost would always cause more concerns than approvals. CityDAO is seen as the decentralized ecosystem that allows many projects to exit in parallel, and the current Town Hall proposal would make it almost impossible for CityDAO to curate more projects.
I also think the yearly expenses is under-estimated and would like to see existing projects supporting this estimation.
Although I didn’t follow the initial discussion around the City Hall proposal, it is clear that some members have raised concerns about the cost of the project and its viability.
It would be nice to go back to the drawing board and ask ourselves what the “original vision” of CityDAO was. What’s our short and long-term goals? Scotts, you are in the right position to outline some of these.
As a secondary direction, I already talked about the farm thing in Africa. Hopefully, I’ll be available on call this Wednesday on Discord to answer any questions.