Meeting Notes: ‣

Outcome: Passed ✅

Outcome Summary

This proposal passed, and we will keep our current budget logic and do another ‘light’/’off’ season, and continue evaluating & researching where we are heading, taking into account feedback from CSDO, steward council and other key decision makers.

We give no strict orders on templating but suggest following the template from previous season (here and here in markdown) with

• 'always-on' objectives or broader re-statements of workstream intent that stewards can cross-reference quickly, along with how those map to essential intents
• ratings (green / yellow / red) describing the health of each S16 objective within the prior budget
• outline of top 5 key planned achievements
• budget detail per initiative + contributor cost

Proposal

• Tension: S17 is fast approaching and we have no new passed seasonal budget approach. Great work has been done by Saf (here) with a proposal covering forecasting, resource allocation and performance evaluation with overall positive comments. A few things are blocking on passing this as is:
  • The new flow would require a bridge budget, as we would only have budgets in our multisig by 03/28 at the earliest (see timing here)
  • Feedback came from CSDO to postpone implementation until we figure out open questions, ao total DAO budget.
  • Feedback came from CSDO members and stewards to break this up in parts and implement gradually, depending on the evolution of our workstreams.
  • We have a proposal up by Kyle with positive CSDO support that proposes thinner workstreams, community bounties & potentially shorter budget cycles for future seasons - these shorter cycles got strong CSDO support in its original google doc comments. (here)
• Proposal:

  • Given the blockers we keep our current budget logic and do another ‘light’/’off’ season and continue evaluating & researching where we are heading, taking into account feedback from CSDO, steward council and other key decision makers.

  • We give no strict orders on templating but suggest following the template from previous season (here and here in markdown) with

    • 'always-on' objectives or broader re-statements of workstream intent that stewards can cross-reference quickly, along with how those map to essential intents
    • ratings (green / yellow / red) describing the health of each S16 objective within the prior budget
    • outline of top 5 key planned achievements
    • budget detail per initiative + contributor cost

  • Timing:

    1/24/2023	Draft OKRs & budgets (!) shared with CSDO in thread
    1/27/2023	Final review with CSDO (3h call)
    1/31/2023	Draft budgets on forum
    2/6/2023	Steward Call
    2/14/2023	Integrated budgets on forum
    2/14/2023	Budgets on Snapshot
    2/21/2023	Budgets on Tally
    2/28/2023	Budgets in multisig

• Clarifying Questions:
  • Jonathan: what is the agreement on using objectives vs outcomes?
    • Writing out some examples of outcome vs OKR-based
  • Are we shifting our seasons?
    • We would continue what we have done in the past
    • Reserves for 1 month, get paid out the 1st of March
• Reactions:
  • Nate: Like the middle ground concept, but keeping original budgeting process might be heavier than it needs to be
    • Middle ground is good, but not the right middle ground
  • Scott: Generally for Alpha rounds and launches to go as smoothly as possible
    • No clear intuition about which of these will be faster
    • For this assuming it achieves the first statement
  • Tigress: Solution is simple, means FDD can do the work
    • Feels like procrastination
  • CoachJ: For this proposal, changes are coming, let’s focus on launch
  • Joe: Agreed with Scott, launch to ETHDenver is primary objectives
    • Would not like to see too many big changes
  • Janine: Agreed with Scott J and Joe
    • Key shared cross stream goals
    • We’re achieving that without having to change the budget
  • Saf: Agree with previous comments
    • Continue what we’re doing
    • Good comments on the forum about other tensions
    • For now this seems like a good in between
  • Kyle: Supportive of trying to make this as lightweight as possible
    • Heads down on ETHDenver
  • Laura: Alignment with previous comments
    • Concern: how we’re communicating this to stewards
    • Plan on Steward relations & narrative around that (for those beyond this core group)
  • Kevin: No objections
  • Jodi: Understand ETHDenver and launch priorities
    • We are kicking the can down the road
    • For it with the intention that we will come back to this proposal about what is safe to try
    • Also holding Kyle’s proposal in mind
    • 2nd light season in a row and indicated to Stewards we would come back with something more fullsome
    • Missed opportunity to explain some of our thinking heading into 2023
    • How can we amend to accommodate 2023 strategy thinking?
• Amendments:
  • stewards - light season
  • Kris to write a post (with Kyle) on what the budget logic is going to be this season
  • Share some of the thinking for light season/kicking the can
  • Pointing out that there has been a lot of work by Saf and we don’t want to rush into a new process
  • Still hold our 3 hr call to give each other feedback before posting on the forum

• Objections?

• Passed?
  • Yes