The First BarnBridge Council

Summary
The BarnBridge core team is proposing the creation of a formalized on-chain body (the First BarnBridge Council) as the next step in the protocol’s continued decentralization. This council will be composed of three members nominated by the team - their backgrounds are provided below. The role of this council would be to represent the community, both in the implementation phase of successful governance proposals and in the coordination of network resources.

It represents the first part of a more long-term vision for a decentralized governance structure that will be shared in an upcoming Medium post.

Description
The First BarnBridge Council would have the following material rights:

  • Representing BarnBridge in discussions with integration partners
  • Staffing and budgeting engagement teams for proposal integrations
  • Sending back proposals to the community in the event of feasibility concerns
  • Communicating via official BarnBridge channels
  • Listing protocol bounties on Gitcoin
  • Coordinating the biweekly project management meetings

Council members would be compensated from the protocol treasury at an annualized rate of $80,000. This figure takes into account both industry standards (e.g., Synthetix councillors received $60,000 in annual compensation) and our expectation that the role would require active project management participation.

The First BarnBridge Council would be held accountable via the following guardrails and restrictions:

  • While on the council, members will be restricted from selling any more than 20% of their existing BOND holdings, as verified and enforced by the core team
  • BarnBridge core team will maintain a public whistleblower email address for tips regarding any wrongdoing or harassment by Council members
  • BOND holders will have the right to recall Council members quarterly in favor of a more preferred candidate
  • BarnBridge Core Team will retain the right to revoke multisig access in extreme circumstances

Council members will undertake reasonable efforts to provide transparent reporting of their efforts via the following channels:

  • #Council channel on Discord
  • Dune Analytics dashboard monitoring budget flows and the performance of any joint on-chain ventures initiated by the Council’s efforts
  • Standardized monthly summaries of relevant milestones and accounting
  • Regular community call participation

Motivation
Our eventual end goal is for the BarnBridge protocol not to require a specialized core team for the further advancement of the protocol. The protocol community should be able to come to a consensus on goals and budgets via the DAO, delegate implementation duties to appointed council(s) responsible for specialized mandates, and rely on ad hoc team formation to staff any and all developments. We view the First BarnBridge Protocol as a chance for the community to step up to the plate, and for us to see what works in practice.

We are nominating the following community members for the First BarnBridge Council:

Technical details
The council would be implemented on-chain via the SquadDAO platform we shared earlier this month - we’ve provided the link below. The council would have no ability to change DAO parameters or access DAO funds unilaterally.

Useful Links

Argumentation
In addition to objections against the nominees themselves, the core team welcomes any feedback regarding the proposed structuring of the council, its compensation, and its guardrails.

3 Likes

My initial thoughts:

There are a lot of great ideas proposed by Synthetix (The Spartan Council election), for example elections are monthly initially. Additionally, nominees provide campaign pitches. What is the rationale for taking a very different approach for BarnBridge?

Will we get to see the BOND addresses of those who are elected? Will we get actual names and credentials of those would are “running” for the position? (You note that backgrounds are listed below but I can only see Pavlo’s via a link).

I do not think that the BarnBridge Core Team should have the ability to revoke multisig access. While I understand the risks, it is an overreach of centralization. The system needs to be rethought if the only way to control a potential bad actor is through a veto by the core team.

Personally, I think three is too few for a proper council. I suspect this was a compromise because there isn’t enough need for a council yet to support more members. Until all the products have launched, I think a single representative (essentially a core team/community liaison) with Core Team oversight would be sufficient. Then we would establish a proper council in 4-5 months when the Core Team is ready to take a back seat. If there really is enough work for 3 people working full time, then I’d rather see it spread over more people (with a commensurate decrease in pay).

As you may have noticed this Banbridge Council has a different scope of responsibilities relative to the Synthetix Council.

It is important to evaluate is based on the proposed functions as opposed to in comparison to other council implementations on other platforms.

The Operations focused role of this council is a feature not a bug. The point of this first proposed council is to serve an important operations function, and is the first of what could be many councils with a wide variety of structures and responsibilities.

The BarnBridge core team serves as just one oversight structure over this proposed council, as this council is essentially a work team, and as such there will be some level of coordination with the core team and a number of core team functions.

Ultimately the BarnBridge DAO holds overall oversight responsibility over the protocol.

The DAO reserves the sole right to ultimately vote in, replace, or change the composition and/or remit of a council though the DAO governance process.

Perhaps the use of the term Council is a misnomer and may evoke certain assumptions of its function that may bring about some confusion? We could potentially change the name if a large number of folks have similar concerns in this vein.

Following my posts in Discord, I suggest to lose the name Council for this body.
Term BarnBridge Council implies supervisory role.

But I suggest to keep BB Council as an idea of elected members that will oversight the Core Team. Although today it is too early.

2 Likes

What would you suggest the name become?

There won’t be a “core” team in the future, the DAO will just govern and there will be a bunch of different “councils”.

Along the lines of @zekapeka comment in Discord, if the council is supposed to represent the community and serve as decentralized governance, then the Core Team should answer to the council, not the other way around.

This proposal is essentially a request for additional support for the Core Team. The people are handpicked by the Core Team and they are overseen by the Core Team. This is certainly fine and likely necessary, but its a stretch to use the term council because they don’t have any decision making authority. Perhaps committee makes more sense, but I don’t see why they aren’t just “3 employees” instead of “1 council.” What function do they serve as a group?

Lastly, I am opposed to any BarnBridge representative who does not provide their real name and credentials. Per this proposal, these people will be the face of BarnBridge and we deserve to know who they are. (“paid by the job” persons can be anonymous)

1 Like

Thanks to the team for considering me for the Technical Council role. I hereby commit to the role and all its duties, and look forward to working with the team!

4 Likes

I suggest technical committee.

1 Like

If this helps clear things up I’m all for it.

How about “Integration Team”, its the primary function of the team. Specific enough but still general enough.

Technical is a pretty broad term. In the future we could potentially have a number of concurrent “technical” focused teams.

4 Likes

Thanks for the nomination - looking forward to contribute. Personally, Integration Team sounds great. Name is more focused on the mandate and optionality for other technical teams in future as Akin mentioned.

Integration team sounds good :slight_smile:

1 Like

I like Integration Team as well.

1 Like