As governance is gaining momentum we propose to have Governance calls in order to generate a new meeting point for the community!
With all the efforts towards fostering and enhancing delegations and the fair amount of proposals coming in it might be of use to have a biweekly/monthly space where initiatives can be presented and debated before jumping into voting. The CLI and Node Operator calls have shown eagerness towards participating in Lido so we’d love to see live governance discussions happening as well!
This may have been contemplated from the DAO side but considering the workload we are more than happy to host them or find an alternative within the community.
Hi! Thank you for the initiative and proposal. Let’s discuss it!
I believe it’s crucial first to define who will participate in these calls and what specific goals we aim to achieve. How do you envision success in this activity for DAO?
I’d like to highlight a few points of my concerns:
Additional Burden on Proposers: bi-weekly governance calls will require extra preparation, potentially slowing decision-making and reducing overall efficiency. Given limited resources, it’s important to carefully consider the necessity of introducing new formats to avoid overburdening key participants/proposers.
Activity Level: Currently, discussion activity remains limited. It’s encouraging to see more participants with the CLI initiative and after the sDVT Module starts, but beyond that, engagement is lacking. The most attention is currently on the delegate platform, though delegates are not yet active in other discussions. Perhaps we should focus on stimulating asynchronous discussions and increasing forum activity first. If you have ideas on how to improve this, I’d love to hear them!
Focus on GOOSE Goals and Mission: Other things that sometimes happen is that governance calls might shift focus from Lido’s mission and strategic goals to governance processes, especially without key contributors’ commitments to participate as speakers. This could lead to an excessive focus on operational aspects at the expense of achieving the project’s long-term objectives. Discussions must remain oriented toward Lido’s growth and strategy.
I believe it’s important to keep this in focus as we work on improving governance.
Also, Many DAOs use governance calls as a communication tool, but I’m curious which ones you consider successful. It would be helpful to study their experiences. What is the reason of that success?
First and foremost the main purpose of having governance calls is to have a live meeting point for the community to participate and have meaningful exchange. Isolating its impact on the overall decision-making process can be a tricky ask since it’s intended to serve a different purpose than efficiency in the same way a IRL event does in its own field.
Nonetheless we definitely agree on the fact that they require preparation and dedication and all the items mentioned need to be addressed for calls to be compelling and have an outcome that justifies the effort.
As we envision it, participation can be aimed but not limited to delegates and overall community members interested in governance. It’s also another communication flow between the community and the DAO Core Units. As per specific goals, increasing engagement, informed participation and retention would be some of the pursued objectives.
Also, on top of having proposers showcasing their RFCs and a communication channel for updates, governance calls can be a space to discuss meta-governance and governance metrics and processes away from pressing voting periods. On that end, Lido has a lot to offer (Dual Governance, EasyTracks, etc)
Cadence is definitely a key aspect and bi-weekly is way too close in time so maybe monthly or bi-monthly could be a middle ground between having the time to prepare the call and not having outdated topics. Naturally, overburdening key participants/proposers is far from desired.
The Delegates Incentive Program is definitely a step forwards toward increasing forum participation and the most widely adopted initiative for DAOs so we’re excited to see its impact and what that leads to.
Another initiative that can be explored towards that end is implementing a reputational system based on participation that can be tied to specific rewards, i.e: having recognized delegates holding badges linked to rewards can incentivize a participatory behavior not tied to direct economic compensation.
100% aligned on this and not shifting the real focus. As mentioned, governance calls are an additional effort towards decentralized governance and by no means they should interfere with long term objectives or compromise Lido’s roadmap. Having the right agenda, good moderation and proper diffusion are some of the aspects that make an impactful call.**
That’s certainly a good question although success standards for governance calls are yet to be set in the ecosystem afaik. Naturally, attendance tends to be the go-to indicator to show the value of the call which of course varies in each case.
100% agree on this. I’m supportive of starting with async discussions and open channels, and slowly ramping up activity level as opposed to implementing governance calls. We can all appreciate that Lido’s focus is a lot more technical in nature (CLI, sDVT) vs. usual delegate focus which is a lot more governance-heavy. I would hate to see the DAO wasting resources on nitty gritty details of creating framework and political governance work. Lido is already doing great job in terms of steering the project (e.g. technical and business development), and my opinion is that delegates should be more a layer of checks and balances to start, instead of trying to steer the discussions.
It’s an admirable effort to host Governance calls, although as mentioned above bi-weekly may be too burdensome to attend on a regular basis. Quarterly basis review of passed proposals and goals seems like a good middle ground for these kinds of discussions.
To increase asynchronous discussions and increase activity/participation, we should establish a delegate chat in telegram with the core contributor delegates as admins. This chat could be an easy, centralized hub for communication that we utilize for proposal discussions. Proposals could be listed in a general template format, prompting the members of the chat to share their opinion there then post a final version of their positioning in the forums.
From our experience in other DAOs, this seems like the lowest hanging fruit to immediately increasing activity and participation.
Lido has a similar call, the Community Update Call, which aims to be held twice a year. It’s focused specifically on updates from contributors regarding Goose goals and provides an opportunity for questions. The next one is in plans for October.