• Sebastian:
  • Probably aligns with consensus around 1. need for ecosystem vision and 2. the yearly strategy at the Core Team level. As he puts it: parts of the Radicle Ecosystem like alt-clients (or other Core Teams) need an annual (or multiple times per year) need to adapt based on user needs - and can’t just rely on a static vision.
  • Radicle strategy re-evaluated each year via RFC format - or revisited during the year. Aligns with consensus that Core Teams should define prios themselves; so the Radicle strategy should be broad enough to be adapted to be adapted to a Core Team’s work and way of working.
  • Some if not all Core Team Leads should be part of guiding/informing/enforcing Radicle strategy. Future could look more like parliamentary/delegate system. There should be ways of removing bad actors
• Andrew:
  • Importance of looking at other DAOs and emulating what works.
  • [VISION]
    • Strategy pillar should define vision; vision should include levels of granularity. Starting with one-liner (for website) then 3-5 one-sentence bullets/short paragraphs. “If there’s ever any doubt, folks can go back to these bullets and check how well what they’re working on does or does not contribute towards the described vision.”
    • the highest-level vision should not change frequently, therefore “I think it is very important to take feedback from all of the primary stakeholders into account, including: (1) core contributors, (2) token-holders, (3) community/users.” This vision-setting exercise is a “unique process, like genesis”… “initial vision-setting should therefore probably be broken out into its own work stream, even if the governance of it ultimately falls under the Strategy Pillar”
  • [STRATEGY PILLAR HOW + WHO]
    • “The Strategy Pillar also needs to define clear processes for how core teams will be created, evaluated, funded and (in some cases) spun-down.” He would opt for more centralized and simple in the beginning of the DAO. “As an example, one idea might be something like the Council we have today, but with the Council members being elected based on some combination of token voting and existing contributor voting, and then the Council members discussing new proposals related to the working groups in the open and then simply voting (among the council members, again in the open) on any new decisions.” Potentially splitting votes electing the Strategy Pillar Council between Core Team and token holders (50/50). Council members should be incentivized in some way
    • “Strategy Pillar should be responsible for defining at least some kind of medium-term roadmap for the project (next 1-2 years). Exact timelines are probably less important than milestones…I think simplicity is much more important that nuance and power/complexity for the first versions of these designs.”
    • “Recall vote” mechanism that can’t be easily abused - not completely explained
    • Proposals evaluated based on:
      • Feasibility (does what they are proposing seem to be possible/likely to work)
      • Alignment (will it make a significant contribution to the greater Vision and Plan)
      • Impact (how much impact can the proposal / Core Team have if they succeed)
    • Strategy pillar should hold Core Teams accountable in the first version of the DAO
      • Each Core Team should have a Team Lead. In case of doubt, Strategy Pillar decides Team Lead. “The Team Lead should work closely with the Strategy Pillar to try to maintain continuous alignment so that issues are caught as early as possible.”
      • Monthly or quarterly checkin between the Strategy Pillar and the Core Team; periodic budgeting check, where work of core team is scaled up or down depending on the budget.
      • Highly controlled Core Teams, concentrated power within Strategy Pillar: “At any time the Strategy Pillar should also be able to propose that the work of a Core Team can be curtailed or shut down entirely if it is no longer serving the overall vision and/or plan”
  • [CORE TEAM STRATEGY] “the medium-term roadmaps, plans, and specific Core Teams and current goals in service of the vision can and should change frequently — there should be some significant changes at least every year” - who manages this is still undefined.