Community Driven Governance Messaging - Project Plan

Community Driven Governance Messaging - Project Plan

Brief Program Description

This document will outline the scope, deliverables, timeline, and people involved with bringing messaging-frameworks to the forums. A community driven plan attempting to answer: ‘How do we make statements on behalf of the DAO, (if we even should) problem’? Especially when a DAO is a collection of individuals with automation at the center. There is a clear need to create an improved system of communication between the DAO, the Maker ecosystem, and the greater DeFi community. Ideally, this would entail an independent team who can communicate objective (governance votes/polls, state of monetary policy), subjective (quotes from community members) and historical information to the public. A potential secondary goal can be to distill public sentiment and relay this to the DAO. The messaging team serves broadly as a relayer.

Working Docs & Relevant Posts

Project Goal & Scope

Why are we working on this?

  • Long Term (Mission Orientated): The DAO needs a credible, independent system of communication to better interface with both stakeholders and the public.
  • Short Term (Action Orientated): Set the scope, find a rhythm, determine communication mediums, leads, and draft deliverables for communicating for the broader community.

To address the complexity of the system, the team’s deliverable will be :

  • A bi-weekly report, written for broad groups of stakeholders & soliciting interest in the DAO, with an aim to address the technical, economic, political, and human-centric aspects of the protocol. This will be facilitated by a weekly/bi-weekly comms team call.
  • A bi-weekly report, written for the DAO, with a synthesis of sentiment from the greater Defi community (as pulled from reddit/twitter) as well as from a DeFi consortium headed by Rich CL.
  • Ongoing research on academic (and Maker domain-specific) resources for learning how to rigorously describe and understand Makers dynamics.
  • Regular activities may include:
    • A Daily ‘touch-base’ with the reddit/twitter/blogosphere?
    • Media-kit for crypto news sites.
    • Semi-private communication system to avoid mis-quotes or inflammatory journalism. TBD.

Clarified Short term major steps

  • Introduce formally in the forum
  • Seek Proposal approval
  • Bi weekly report on Maker for public consumption
    • first report roughly two weeks from the approval of this CDIP
  • Stagger Bi weekly report on the public for Maker, so due one week after the first report on Maker
  • Prototyping methods for engaging with the press

Expanded Scope Description for more context (from Adrian):

“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”― Mark Twain

DAO Communication / PR Mission and Scope

  • Provide guidance and best known methods for the community to follow around clear and appropriate communication with regard to the following types of information:
    • Controversial information - USDC regulated collateral, black swan events, etc.
    • Contradictory information - Rumors, misunderstood positions, journalistic errors.
    • Confusing information - Making technical information salient and understandable.
    • Evolving information - Little is known but there are a lot of questions.
    • Lack of information - Documentation, resources, training, ease of understanding.
    • High stakes information - Everyone’s freaking out, the world is ending, damage control, blow back, privacy, libel/slander, need to know basis.
    • Subjective vs objective information - smart contract interactions, verifiable numbers vs what they mean in context
  • Ensure that DAO communications are inclusive and represent all stakeholders to the best of our knowledge(Dai holders, vault owners, keepers etc).
  • Clearly define the mechanism / go-to, for up to the minute DAO communication.
  • Aggregate and make accessible ecosystem information and news relevant to MakerDAO PR to the DAO.
  • Create a channel or procedure for press requests.
  • Manage and establish social media avenues that allow one or two way information flow (as appropriate).

Deadlines or Timelines (subject to change)

04/2/2020 - First Draft of proposal published on forums for additional feedback

04/4/2020 - Finished proposal submitted to CDIP team.

tbd - If approved, first official messaging team meeting.

~04/18/2020 - If approved, first “report” on Maker .

~04/25/2020 first “report” to Maker

Project Success Measurements

What does it mean for this project to be successful/finished for this term?

  • Setting leads who commit to some amount of management of DAO-messaging
  • Reporting on the protocol and governance
  • Reporting on public perceptions
  • Something akin to signalling but specifically ‘participatory messaging’ where statements are, eventually, strengthened by consensus.
  • A way to capture threads of ideas, threats, concepts, or recent news as an aggregate and issue “no-consensus statements”
  • Transparent sourcing of information

Project Owners

Will re-evaluate in June

  1. Igor - Writer
  2. Mitote - Lead
  3. LFW - Governance Liaison
  4. Tim (Adviser)
  5. Adrian (adrianhacker-pdx) for MKR Holder DAI-gest repurpose
Potential Framework for data capture
Type Medium and/or Source etc.) Messaging Guidance
[Thread, Statement, Vote, Signed transactions] (E.g. Forums, Reddi, Twitter, etc.) (Link to doc, comments, or rocketchat working group) [Controversial information,Contradictory information, Confusing information, Evolving information, Lack of information, High stakes information, Subjective vs objective information, Foundation Specific]

Open Questions

Some previous discussion of these questions are added as a comment

Questions pulled from notes that we should address throughout the project, especially when we are stuck. Reference at the beginning and at the end of the project. Did we answer these?

How does scientific governance communicate? Or how can we be scientific in communicating?

Framework for communication, without a bias towards english speakers.

How to be thorough/comprehensive understandings of events/procedures/news?

How to condense public sentiment? How to condense forum sentiment?

Cadence?

Do we run this like a Town Hall?

How does this engage with the DeFi consortium?

How does this intersect with the current communications strategy & mediums that exist?

How to move towards independence from the foundation.

Should we have transparency in funding?

1 Like

Historical Comment thread on the “Open questions” section of the google doc:

David U:

My open questions:

  1. Is this meant to turn into an elected domain team by the DAO?
  2. Am I right in understanding that this is an attempt to better document and standardize the communications around MakerDAO, and putting those responsibilities in the hands of community members who will eventually be paid by the DAO to do this?
  3. Should a team like this be paid for by comm-dev in the interim?
  4. Does this go through a CDIP process, or should this perhaps go through the forum signaling process (using the CDIP as a template)
  5. Does approval of this initiative lie on comm-dev or on MakerDAO(MKR voters)?
  6. Is the communications system independent if it gets paid by comm-dev (ie: the foundation)?
  7. How does this intersect with the current communications strategy&mediums that exist?

Leo (mitote):

Thoughts on some of your questions

2: I think so basically, just in the ethos of scientific governance (I have my thoughts on what that means, but obviously its a continuous debate). Not sure about the DAO part though. Personally I think it makes more sense for the DAO to start paying devs/risk before this sort of thing.

3: That’s how I was guessing this was gonna play out.

4: I think that’s a good idea, signaling with the CDIP as template.

6: is a great question that I have been wondering about. Like the group of us that did the collateral on-boarding thing were paid by the foundation, but people described it as a “community led” initiative which made me feel a little weird.

David Utrobin:

(relating to question 6) I think one piece that needs to be figured out is how the protocol can provide funding instead of the Foundation.


continues on tangential discussion about DAO funding

Looking at Davids questions again I realized these need to be answered so I would add:

1: Not necessarily, hard to predict how governance will form. Other revenue streams are possible as well.
5: Comms-Dev for now unless MKR holders would want otherwise
7: Remains to be seen, the potential difference I see is that this imitative is more journalistic by nature and the comms-devs exists for the foundation to develop the community.