A new DAO was created (LunarDAOII - LIP-0005) with the help of many participants in the background. The DAO wouldn’t have been successful in raising over 100 ETH for DarkFi R&D without the hard work of many.
Problem
There are many moving parts that went into LunarDAOII. Everyone that helped stand up LunarDAOII were focused on the goal of the successful launch of a new DAO raise. The efforts of everyone, however, do not go unnoticed.
Solution
We propose to mint 100k VOX2 governance token which will be distributed by stewards to all contributors of LunarDAOII creation whether anon or not as a token of appreciation.
The goal is to include them in the participation of LunarDAOII. This expands the big tent of LunarDAOII and shows solidarity with our fellow builders that made this happen.
The gratitude for helping to support LunarDAOII comes from many including devs, admins for hosting/domain management, as well as research and continuous effort of stewards.
Implementation
If proposal LIP-0007 does not need significant changes, the vote will occur after a date is agreed upon and shared throughout the community channels.
Following this, a DAO token request proposal will be enacted from LunarDAOII (https://dao2.lunardao.net).
After the proposal & grace period ends with the minimum quorum met, tokens will be minted and sent to the listed steward address and then distributed to the aforementioned supporters.
Thank you for posting this and bringing the discussion here.
We’ve been discussing this for a few weeks on DarkIRC. I dont have a concern with 10% new VOX2 for the different parties that helped in the background. A friendly gesture to all who stood this up. I dont think 10% is a large concern to mess with the governance weighting either.
The most important thing we walk away with is that we bring our allies that helped make it possible to support strong privacy tech, and I believe this is a perfect gesture to achieve that.
Here are some breaking points - % of the total proposed sum:
DAOhaus devs - normally take fees when supporting to bootstrap new dao - they didn’t to let all ETH go to the cause. 10-20% should go them
Firn devs - despite all, Firn devs built a custom app to enable anon LunarDAOII squad creation. It seems the devs don’t expect further rewards but we want to offer them 10%
LD stewards - Core team pulling this DAO from the beginning, including this raise and LDII genesis. The team pays for all op related costs (hosting, domain etc), maintains wiki and admin entire infra - the rest as a gov token of appreciation.
When I said 10-20% that is from the proposed allocation. So if the proposal is 10% it’s 10-20% from that which is 1-2% of total (which is usual daohaus fee for setting up a DAO).
Just to clarify: there was a DarkFi LIP 0005 fundraiser. Approx 100 ETH (or ~$350k) was raised, with donators receiving VOX2 governance token.
This proposal (LIP 0007) is saying to dilute the gov token holders by minting 10% more token which is roughly $35k. According to the proposed numbers, this means:
$7k given to DAOhaus
$3.5k given to Firn devs
~$25k to LunarDAO stewards
Questions:
How many stewards are there?
Are the funds held collectively or rewarded individually?
Is there a breakdown of the budget?
Why are funds sent to Firn after they essentially rugged by closing the project without any pre-warning to funders?
Also I just note that costs should have been clearly communicated upfront before people donated. Imagine there’s a sale then they salesman goes “… and there’s a 10% sales tax”. I’d note that in money management fees are usually more in the range of 2.5-5%.
This is a very very delicate subject, especially since it’s now being proposed after fact. This should be widely discussed and publicised with the entire community, in particular donators rather than being pushed through quickly. I’m not against the proposal, but it could have bad repercussions for the DAO and everybody who has vouched for the DAO if there’s a perception of rugging.
Everything must be crystal clear. It’s your responsibility as those asking to actively seek after and engage the wider community on their thoughts about how to ethically handle this so everybody feels content. The most important keyword is transparency.
What type of precedent does a mint of 10% more tokens set? At what stage is LunarDAO in it’s success so far in stead of what is the future vision of it might be? These are two distinct questions I am asking myself now.
Funds don’t have to be send to Firn, if the squad is against - the proposal based on the fact that Firn made a gateway for people to join the DAO in an anonymous way which resulted in quite a successful raise.
Re communication: Here is a LunarDAO II architecture - see commits that there wene’t changes done since the raise (that’s why we keep it on GH).
In that chapter s stated:
Fees and Operation Costs
LunarDAOII has 4 Stewards (core-team > members, founders) at the time of launch.
Several externals are supporting with design, administration, legal questions, software development and >translations.
To fund operation and development an LIP is submitted and voted upon.
Could we be more explicit - yes, 100%, critique taken. While communication should be improvd please keep in mind:
This is a proposal - it’s up for discussion, vote, ppl can rage quit - this is a democratic practice in progress, not any direct implementation - all numbers can be changed and then it’s still due to governance process
Daohaus and LD stewards took off all the entry fees to allow 100% go for DarkFi and allow for this process to be shaped and decided with the newly formed squad instead of setting an upfron entry fee
It has been communicated in the paper which has been among top links with all announcements - despite shortcomings, people have access to this information
Up until some point we were clear with all costs going into this DAO: lip/lip-0002.md at main · lunardao/lip · GitHub - giving the failure of funding the operations, research and development, we went into less demanding, but also less productive mode and pulled through crypto winter resulting with quite successful raise for project we want to support.
It’s unsustainable to raise large sums, take all the work like research, infra, promotion, risk and responsibility connected to this, do it for free and pay devs and other support from our pocket. That’s the opposite to what squad wealth means and why we started this project.
TLDR: None of the stewards is rushing to put it on chain to vote - it’s not in anyones interest here to make the squad or community split or come out as yet another crypto scammer with a few pennies in a pocket. We rather continue as it is or change accordingly our approach but with dignity and fairness to our intentions and aims - no one is getting rugged and this was never a thought.