dYdX Operations subDAO V2

Authors: Joanna, Callen.


With the initial term for the dYdX Operations subDAO (“OPS subDAO”) expiring on June 19, 2023 (“DOT 1.0”), we are creating this DRC on behalf of the dYdX Operations Trust (“DOT”) to discuss a potential proposal to request $6.6M of funding from the dYdX community treasury to be transferred to the DOT’s multi-sig to fund operations of the OPS subDAO for an additional 18-month term (“DOT 2.0”).


  • To run the DOT for the next 18 months, we plan to request $6,600,000 from the dYdX Treasury to cover costs and contributor compensation
  • We plan to recruit an Operations Lead, a Technical Project Lead, and a Site Reliability Engineer to scale the Ops subDAO and to provide technical support to prepare the dYdX DAO for the future
  • We plan to Identiy an indexer operator and contribute to deploying an indexer in the potential future version of the dYdX protocol
  • We plan to contribute to deploying open-source software and the running of a version of the iOS app, Android app, and website (browser) front-ends for the potential future version of the dYdX protocol
  • We plan to engage a third-party auditor to assess DOT’s finances and performance, as well as increasing the number of trustees on DOT’s multisig
  • Remaining funds at the end of the DOT 2.0 mandate will be sent to a community controlled wallet at the discretion of the dYdX community


dYdX Operations subDAO is starting this discussion to renew the DOT for an additional 18-month term with a fresh mandate.

On December 19, 2022, the proposal to create the DOT as a dYdX subDAO passed, and 225,000 DYDX were transferred from the dYdX community treasury to fund the DOT’s operations during an initial 6-month term. DOT’s initial 6-month term ends on June 19, 2023.

On 15 May 2023, the dYdX Foundation posted “Exploring the dYdX Operations subDAO’s near future” and explained that the dYdX ecosystem is approaching a critical juncture with the potential launch of dYdX V4 mainnet and the initial 6-month term of the DOT expiring on June 19, 2023.

To prepare the dYdX DAO for the potential launch of dYdX V4 mainnet, the dYdX Operations SubDAO is creating this DRC on behalf of the DOT to discuss a potential proposal to request $6.6M of funding from the dYdX community treasury to be transferred to the DOT’s multi-sig to fund operations under the mandate described below.

We would appreciate any community feedback on the proposal outlined below. After the discussion has reached a rough consensus, a Snapshot vote will be created in accordance with the proposal lifecycle. If the Snapshot vote is successful, an on-chain vote will be created under the short timelock executor.

Context and Motivation

On November 9, 2022, Reverie posted a DRC outlining the potential creation of an Operations subDAO with the primary purpose, among other responsibilities, of building and iterating on a DAO playbook, establishing fiat banking capabilities to cover non-crypto expenses (e.g. legal expenses, providers, etc…), and managing a DAO communication channel (e.g., Slack or community-managed Discord).

On December 19, 2022, the proposal to create the DOT as a dYdX subDAO passed, and 225,000 DYDX were transferred from the dYdX community treasury to fund the DOT’s operations during an initial 6-month term. The vote represented “DYDX Consent” (as defined in the Trust Instrument) to form the DOT, a Guernsey non-charitable Purpose Trust, with Reverie Reserves, LLC, Joanna Pope, and Callen Van Den Elst appointed as trustees and George Beall appointed as the enforcer.

On 15 May 2023, the dYdX Foundation posted, “Exploring the dYdX Operations subDAO’s near future.” In that post, the dYdX Foundation explained that the dYdX ecosystem was approaching a critical juncture, and that it is probably in the dYdX community’s best interest to discuss a potential second mandate for the DOT to increase the likelihood that the dYdX DAO is prepared for the potential mainnet launch of dYdX V4.

Before we discuss the DOT 2.0 proposal, we want to highlight the progress made so far in the DOT 1.0 mandate.

DOT 1.0

In the initial proposal to form the dYdX Operations subDAO, the DOT received a total of $360,000 (225,000 DYDX) from the dYdX community treasury to operationalize DOT 1.0. The key deliverables, status, and details for each main responsibility outlined in DOT 1.0 are included in the table below.

Deliverable Status Details
Trust formation Completed A Guernsey Purpose Trust was established with three Trustees and one Enforcer.
Open a fiat bank account for the Ops Trust Ongoing The OPS subDAO now has a fiat bank account via REAP.

Specifically, this serves as a crypto-offramp, which allows for credit card payments and transfers to a bank account. This setup is unlike a traditional bank account where the Ops subDAO has an IBAN and cannot receive payments in fiat.

A separate banking application with BCB is still pending, which is working on IBAN as a backup.

A larger account balance received through community treasury funding would likely facilitate the acceptance of a banking application.
Hire and manage external legal staff for ongoing guidance Completed The OPS subDAO has worked with Ogier, a Guernsey-based Law Firm, on ongoing legal matters.
Payments and Financial Reporting Completed The OPS subDAO has made its balance sheet and transactions public.
Create communication channels for the Ops subDAO, as needed, which can serve as the standard dYdX DAO’s communication channel(s) going forward Completed On April 4, 2023, the vote to transition the dYdX community forums from Commonwealth to Discourse passed with almost unanimous support from the dYdX community.

As a result, the Ops subDAO has launched dydx.forum on Discourse.
Build and share a DAO playbook for launching new dYdX subDAOs Completed The Ops subDAO has released the first version of the dYdX DAO playbook.

The DAO playbook may be revised and updated based on community feedback and new developments.

Looking Ahead: DOT 2.0

On 15 May 2023, the dYdX Foundation posted, “Exploring the dYdX Operations subDAO’s near future.” We agree that the dYdX ecosystem is approaching a critical juncture with the potential launch of dYdX V4 mainnet and the initial 6-month term of the DOT expiring on June 19, 2023.

From our perspective, it is critical for the dYdX DAO, and specifically the OPS subDAO, to take steps before the potential launch of dYdX V4 on mainnet to ensure that the dYdX DAO has the resources, tools, and infrastructure it needs to lead a fully decentralized version of the dYdX protocol. As a result, we believe it’s necessary to kickstart a discussion about DOT 2.0.

Proposal - DOT 2.0


The main responsibilities of DOT 2.0 will include:

  • Recruiting an Operations Lead, a Technical Project Lead, and a Site Reliability Engineer to scale the Ops subDAO and to provide technical support to prepare the dYdX DAO for the future
  • Identify an indexer operator and contribute to deploying an indexer in the potential future version of the dYdX protocol
  • Deploying open-source software and running a version of the iOS app, Android app, and website (browser) front-ends for the potential future version of the dYdX protocol
  • The dYdX community values transparency and accountability highly. In light of this, the mandate includes engaging a third-party auditor to assess DOT’s finances and performance, as well as increasing the number of trustees on DOT’s multisig


Operations Lead

As a priority, we believe sourcing an Operations Lead (“OL”) is imperative for scaling the OPS subDAO.

In “Exploring the dYdX Operations subDAO’s near future”, the dYdX Foundation explained that the next potential mandate for the DOT could include, among other things:

  • “managing a DAO communications platform,
  • managing accounting, payroll, and payments infrastructures,
  • creating and executing a strategy to increase the transparency of dYdX DAO communications and decision-making, and
  • developing and operationalizing a budget and transparently publishing documentation to justify spending.”

We agree with the mandate and think that the OPS subDAO requires an OL to effectively scale the OPS subDAO.

The main responsibilities of the OL would include but are not limited to:

  • Managing the dYdX Operations Trust’s operations and workflows,
  • Identifying potential auditors for the dYdX DAO and serving as the primary point of contact and leading the relationship with the auditor,
  • Oversee the tracking of financial and payment workflows,
  • Create best-practice documentation for future subDAO SOPs,
  • Support with treasury management strategies to mitigate risk,
  • Setting up and managing accounting, payroll, and payment infrastructure, and
  • Assist with building and enabling a small team including a technical project lead and a site reliability engineer, to provide operational support to the dYdX DAO.
  • Manage the DAOs communication channels, such as Discourse and Discord, any others,
  • Manage vendor relationships relevant to User Support.

Technical Project Lead

In “Exploring the dYdX Operations subDAO’s near future,” the dYdX Foundation advised that “it would likely be in the best interest of the dYdX community if the potential second mandate of the DOT included the necessary technical capabilities to properly position the dYdX DAO for the potential mainnet launch of dYdX V4.” Based on the information available, we agree that the dYdX DAO requires technical capabilities, and a TPL would be a first step to fill this gap.

The main responsibilities of the TPL would include but are not limited to:

  • Developing a plan to attract and retain builders, validators, front-end operators, and indexer operators in the dYdX community,
  • Creating documentation, SDKs, tutorials, developer tools, and presentations that can be leveraged for internal and external consumption,
  • Coordinating with third-party builders who are interested in building on dYdX V4 open source code,
  • Supporting the deployment, operations, and maintenance of the 3 Front-Ends (iOS, Android, Website) and the Indexer, and
  • Providing the necessary technical capabilities to support the potential mainnet launch of dYdX V4.

Site Reliability Engineer

Separately, we believe that hiring a Site Reliability Engineer (“SRE”) is required to ensure that community infrastructure is stable, reliable, and able to handle the demands of users.

The main responsibilities of the SRE would include, but are not limited to:

  • Ensuring high availability, latency, performance, capacity, scalability, and deployment of DOT infrastructure,
  • Extending and maintaining a scalable infrastructure system,
  • Debuging, optimizing code, and automating routine tasks,
  • Assisting in the design and improvement of monitoring, alerting and remediation solutions with a focus on proactively identifying and addressing production issues,
  • Investigating and leading efforts to remediate critical operational productions issues,
  • Coaching teams across the dYdX ecosystem on best practices for deployment, observability and scalability,
  • Maintaining and creating technical documentation of infrastructure as code/data, while also having knowledge of version control using tools, and
  • Supporting services through activities such as system design consulting, developing software platforms and frameworks, and capacity planning.

On May 16, 2023 dYdX Trading published “v4 Technical Architecture Overview”. The post contained information the indexer and front-ends and demonstrates the need to hire technical talent at the dYdX DAO. We believe that hiring a TPL and a SRE will provide the necessary technical capabilities to support the potential mainnet launch of dYdX V4 during the proposed DOT 2.0 mandate.

We have posted job descriptions for OL, TPL, and SRE roles. We invite members of the dYdX community to review the job descriptions, apply through this link, or forward the job descriptions to network referrals that you think could be a good fit at the OPS subDAO.

Hiring for the OL, TPL, and SRE positions depends on a successful on-chain proposal that results in the DOT 2.0 budget being funded by the dYdX community treasury. We opened the JDs now to start building out a pipeline of applicants.

Future scope and technical capabilities

On March 27, 2023, dYdX Trading Inc. announced the completion of Milestone 3 and that it will “publish open-source deployment configurations and scripts (where applicable) for the validator (protocol), indexer, and front-end services.” Subject to a successful mainnet deployment of dYdX V4 by the dYdX DAO, the Operations subDAO will likely need to hire a small team of engineers and vendors to enable the deployment and/or operate key components of the dYdX V4 architecture.


“The Indexer is a read-only collection of services whose purpose is to index and serve blockchain data to users in a more efficient and web2-friendly way. This is done by consuming real time data from a v4 full node, storing it in a database, and serving that data through a websocket and REST requests to end-users.”

Why doesn’t the OPS subDAO run an indexer itself? Three reasons: (1) we think that the capabilities required to run an indexer are beyond the scope of the OPS subDAO, (2) running the front-end(s) will likely take a lot of bandwidth, and (3) to increase decentralization in the V4 ecosystem: we do not think it is a good idea to have the front-end(s) and indexer centrally operated by the OPS subDAO (even if it is a community-controlled subDAO).

Similar to the front-end, we look forward to potentially multiple indexer operators participating in the dYdX V4 ecosystem. However, to increase the likelihood that the potential launch of dYdX V4 is successful, the OPS subDAO will work with at least one-third party to run an indexer.


dYdX Trading announced that it is building software for three front-ends that will be open-sourced: an iOS app, an Android app, and a website (browser) front-end. All three front-ends will interact with the Indexers through APIs and Websockets. To ensure that the potential launch of dYdX V4 on mainnet is successful, we think it’s fitting for the OPS subDAO to deploy the respective open-source software and run a version of all three front-ends.

The dYdX community has started discussing decentralising the V4 dYdX frontend in the dYdX forum. While we are fully aligned with eventually having multiple front-ends for dYdX V4, we think it would be beneficial to have at least one version of each front-end deployed by the OPS subDAO to ensure that users depending on a front-end will be able to access dYdX V4 at the time of the potential mainnet release.

User Support

Providing comprehensive and responsive user support is essential to user satisfaction and retention. As the Defi market continues to grow, it’s crucial that the OPS subDAO stays ahead of the curve. As such, we think it would beneficial to have user support under the OPs subDAO mandate. What this fully incorporates is yet to be defined, but we feel hiring a contractor/s to support users on the dYdX exchange help-desk will be a priority. Based on the volume of queries, interaction rate, and community feedback, we could also look to provide additional support on Discord and any other communication channels that is deemed appropriate.


To run the DOT for the next 18 months, we plan to request $6,600,000 from the dYdX Treasury to cover costs and contributor compensation.

Note we are scoping out all associated costs and thus the budget may be updated accordingly. Most of this budget is expected to be converted to USDC and/or fiat USD, and the remainder will be reserved for native token compensation. We will address the conversion of DYDX into USDC and/or USD in a future update to this proposal.

Category Specifics Total Funding (18 Months) Rationale
Contributor compensation Operations Lead
- $100-130,000 USDC / year
$195,000 Hedgey - DAO compensation

Maker SES

How much does it really cost to run a DAO? (Maker, LIDO, SUSHI)
Technical Project Lead
- $130-160,000 USDC / year
Site Reliability Engineer
- $130-160,000 USDC / year
Administration Trustee Compensation
- 5 Trustees ($2000 USDC / month each)
$180,000 We believe this is an adequate compensation
Enforcer Compensation
- 1 Enforcer ($1500 USDC / month)
$27,000 We believe this is an adequate compensation
External Auditor
- DAO Auditing / Accounting
$80,000 Non-technical financial audits & potentially other auditing
Technical Contractors Indexer $2,000,000 TBC - Estimated on the high side for a total cost, with the addition of consulting services.
Consulting Services(Dev & Security Services) $350,000
User Support $360,000 5-6 FTE’s at $3-3500 / month each
Osmosis Support Lab

Legal & Compliance
Legal Service
(legal services of law firms in drafting and negotiating legal documents and providing required regulatory advice)
$360,000 On the high side, but costs may add up. We believe the DAO should be prepared for this.
Legal Provisions $1,000,000
Software and IT

Subscriptions for SaaS service providers like:
- Google Workspace (drive, email),
- Discourse (governance forum),
- Workable (HR),
- Amplitude (data analytics),
- GitHub (code repositories)
- This list is non-exhaustive.
$94,000 Cost estimation for the services described and other potential software & IT incurred costs.

- Infrastructure deployment and maintenance costs,
- Web and mobile
$360,000 The estimated costs to set up, run and maintain front-end (FE) infrastructure and any other costs
Operating Costs Translations
Bank Fees
Gas Fees
$468,500 Translation services, transaction costs and any deployment costs. Upper limit budgets, but costs we don’t feel the Ops subDAO should skimp on
Other Miscellaneous Costs Buffer $450,000 Funding buffer to account for a market downturn, inflation/cost increases and/or unforeseen events or expenses.
Total $6,404,500
Total Requested $6,600,000 A portion of the additional $195,500 (additional to $6,404,500) will be used for token compensation


1. The Ops subDAO will be audited annually by external auditors.
2. Any remaining funds at the end of the DOT 2.0 mandate will be sent to a community-controlled wallet at the discretion of the dYdX community.
3. Part of the legal fees budget and the buffer will be utilized as justification to open the FIAT bank account
4. The DOT currently has $87,077.50 USDC remaining. We are proposing to roll over any remaining budget to DOT 2.0.

Initial thoughts on measuring success:


Objective - Attract and retain high-quality talent and build out the OPS subDAO team.

Key results -

  1. Offer competitive compensation benchmarked against industry standards.
  2. Hire 3 dedicated contributors as outlined above.
  3. Scale the OPS subDAO team depending on the needs of the dYdX DAO.


Objective - Streamline administrative processes and optimize resources.

Key results -

  1. Improve communication from the OPS subDAO and community engagement.
  2. Reposition the role of the enforcer to focus on increasing disclosure and transparency for the dYdX community.
  3. Engage third-party auditors to provide an impartial source of disclosure to the dYdX community.


Objective - Work with third-party vendors to deploy the open-sourced indexer code and run an indexer for dYdX V4 mainnet.

Key results -

  1. Evaluate contractor performance on SLA compliance, indexing efficiency, and issue resolution time regularly.
  2. Evaluate the quality and completeness of documentation and knowledge transfer to minimize mutual dependencies.
  3. Monitor and optimize resource usage, contractor costs, billing, and reporting.
  4. Provide accurate and reliable data to the dYdX community.

Legal & Compliance

Objective - Ensure compliance with all relevant regulations and minimize legal risks for the dYdX protocol and dYdX DAO.

Key results -

  1. Identify the main legal, regulatory and compliance risks faced by the OPS subDAO.
  2. Identify and engage jurisdiction-specific legal service providers according to legal issues that arise.


Objective - deploy the respective open-sourced code and run a version of all three front-ends (iOS, Android, Web).

Key results -

  1. Infrastructure deployment and maintenance with set targets for service uptime and downtime duration.
  2. Evaluate user experience metrics, page load time, and rendering speed.
  3. Functioning versions of the front-end for Web, iOS, and Android. We plan to first prioritize deploying the web front-end and subsequently focus on the iOS and Android apps.

DOT 2.0 Trust Instrument Changes

Reverie Reserves, LLC, and George Beall have decided that they will no longer be involved in the DOT as a trustee and the enforcer, respectively, after the expiration of the current term on June 19, 2023. As a result, we are actively looking for a new trustee and a new enforcer.

In accordance with the Trust Instrument, we plan to include the replacement of Reverie Reserves, LLC, and George Beall as action items during this community vote for DOT 2.0. If we do not find suitable replacements during this voting period, an additional community vote may be required.

We recognize that as funding increases, adding additional security measures becomes increasingly important. As such, we are looking to increase the number of trustees from 3 to 5. If the vote is successful, we will amend the Trust Instrument to reflect the changes.


  • Joanna Pope
  • Callen Van Den Elst
  • TBD
  • TBD
  • TBD


  • TBD

We invite members of the dYdX community to comment on this thread if they are interested in becoming a trustee or an enforcer in the DOT.

Please read the Foundation blog post “Legal Framework for Non-U.S. Trusts in Decentralized Autonomous Organizations” to understand the requirements and expectations of trustees and enforcers.

Separately, the DOT currently has $87,077.50 USDC remaining. We are proposing to roll over any remaining budget to DOT 2.0.

Next Steps, Specification, and Implementation

In accordance with the proposal lifecycle, once a rough consensus has been reached, we will create a Snapshot vote.

If the Snapshot vote is successful, an on-chain vote is required to transfer DYDX from the community treasury to the DOT multi-sig.

The specifics of the implementation will be addressed at a later stage of the proposal lifecycle.

Additional Resources


Hi Joanna & Callen,

Some points from my end but firstly, well done on this well thought out proposal!

Firstly, I applaud your focus on ensuring that you segregate different subject-matters so as to include further participants in separate groups and thus, increase participation headcount and, correspondingly, our level of decentralization. This is especially the case with regard to segregating the Indexer and Front-ends. With regard to the Front-end I do agree that having the OpsSubDAO speahead the initial efforts to have further community-run front-ends in the future is a very good first step + it will give the community time to research and develop an adequate user-friendly way of hosting a front-end.

My only query relates to the job-positions cited in the proposal. To my knowledge, Trustees have to be added to the Trust structure following a vote by dYdX Tokenholders. Thus, this begs two questions:

Will the Operations Lead, Technical Project Lead and Site Reliability Engineer need to be Trustees on the DOT or will they be onboarded as Independent Contractors? (Based on the Budget section I assume the latter).

Why is the Trustee compensation so low in comparison to the other roles? I think incentivising Trustees by adding to their compensation would not only attract high-quality trustees, but it would also reward Trustees such as yourself and Callen. In this regard, I am of the opinion that Trustee compensation should be increased (at least doubled in my personal opinion). I do not foresee that the community will have an issue with financially incentivising Trustees further considering the good work not only put in this proposal, but the good work you’ll be carrying out in the next 18 months based on this proposal!

Again, well done to both you and Callen for such a well-drafted and thought out proposal - I look forward to seeing you both get to work on this!


Hey Joanna and Callen,

Thanks for taking the time to create this post and structuring the next phase for DOT. Definitely agree with all the proposed scopes and roles.

However, I have the following concerns:

a. As DOT 2.0 entails an 18 month commitment, this appears to extend far beyond the conventional 6 month programmes implemented on dYdX. Will the team foresee any complications with this prolonged arrangement (eg. performance evaluation etc)?

b. On the tech aspects, it’s great that additional service providers can be onboarded. However, I think it’d be great if the tech stack shared by the Team can be included in the scope as well for both SRE and Tech Lead (eg. for the FE - web and mobile. i.e. JS, React, Swift, Kotlin) for applicants to be aware of.

In addition, for the Ops lead, there appears to be 5 distinct areas of focus:

  • Comms, Finance, Strategy, Compliance, User Support

While contractors are engaged for the last component, will potential additional staff be needed too? (esp since other subDAOs will likely be launched next year - eg. finance lead to handle payrolls etc). As highlighted in the post, MakerDAO’s SES has 9 contributors, alongside a separate Strategic Finance Unit.

While it’s understandable that perhaps we may not need that many to begin with, I believe an expense should be allocated for future hiring within Ops to support in these areas. After all, much progress can happen within 1.5 years and the Ops lead ought to receive explicit support in these fronts (eg. an additional 1/2 members) in the later part of V2 when the infrastructures have been established.

Edit: I assume that these aren’t subsumed under the “Buffer” section.

c. There appears to be a difference in compensation when benchmarked against other DAOs (eg. MakerDAO, Lido, Sushi etc as shared in the link provided) and the previous DOT 1.0. I was wondering if the team can elaborate on the rationale for the range and figures.

Thank you!


Hi Joanna & Callen,

Thank you for putting together such a detailed and well-thought-out proposal for the dYdX Operations subDAO V2. After reviewing the proposal, I am personally in full support of it in its current form.

I applaud the focus on ensuring proper transparency and accountability with the use of an external auditor. It is also great to see that the roles of trustees and enforcer will be open to community members. Opening these roles truly resonates with our principles of shared governance. This move, I believe, will not only promote wider participation but also enrich the breadth of perspectives influencing our progress.

I particularly appreciate the breakdown between trustees and enforcer acting purely as representatives, with a longer assessment period of 18 months, and the Full-Time Employees (FTEs) of the Ops SubDAO acting more as contributors with a shorter assessment period at the discretion of the trustees.

I believe this structure makes a lot more sense, and it avoids any conflicts in which a trustee or enforcer is performing operational tasks that may require a shorter evaluation/assessment period. It also ensures that the legal structure of the trust remains fully compliant.

Thank you for all your hard work!


Great job on putting together this proposal for the renewal of the dYdX Operations subDAO. It’s clear that a lot of thought and planning has gone into it.

It’s good to see that there is a clear plan for the next 18 months, with specific areas of focus. Also, the focus on transparency by engaging a third-party auditor and increasing the number of trustees on DOT multisig to further enhance governance.

Overall, I believe this proposal addresses the needs of the OPS subDAO and aligns with the goals of the dYdX community. It sets a clear path for the future and prepares the dYdX DAO for the launch of dYdX V4.

Great work, and thank you for sharing this proposal with the community!


Hello Joanna and Callen,

Your proposal is incredibly well thought out. The vision you’ve outlined and your considerations regarding budgeting and accountability reflect a deep understanding of the DAO’s needs.

I appreciate the 18-month commitment. It assures stability, a key factor for the success of any project, and therefore receives my full support.

The engagement of an external auditing firm is a commendable measure that will significantly increase transparency and accountability within the subDAO.

On the subject of Trustee compensation, I concur with @Immutablelawyer. Trustees hold crucial roles and should be adequately compensated for their efforts. Incentivising trustees with higher compensation could attract more qualified individuals to these roles, thereby strengthening the subDAO.

As for the budget, it appears proportionate and reasonable for the scope of operations. However, I echo @0xcchan’s sentiments, urging us to consider potential needs for additional staff as the subDAO expands. Allocating resources for future hiring within Ops could provide needed support in key areas.

Also, as @0xcchan pointed out, providing details on the tech stack required for the Tech Lead and SRE roles would give applicants a clear understanding of what’s expected of them.

I align with @Alucard in appreciating the proposal’s dedication to shared governance and transparency. Dividing roles between trustees, enforcers, and FTEs is a sensible approach that enhances compliance and avoids potential conflicts.

Lastly, echoing @Ax07’s sentiments, this proposal prepares the dYdX DAO well for the launch of dYdX V4 by setting a clear path for the future.

Again, you’ve done a great job with the proposal. I look forward to further discussions, including the AMA with @James | dYdX Foundation.



Hi Joanna, Callen, thanks for your proposal, but seems lots of stuffs not clear to me so need your help.

  1. For hosting Indexer service, its understandable but for frontend apps, its not quite clear. As I know for production release, 1 version of each components will be released (1 repo for webapp, 1 for android and 1 for ios), and dydx development team of course need to deploy those components before releasing, for decentralized purpose, another team should CREATE/IMPLEMENT new code repo (like multi execution/consensus team of Ethereum) not re-use it for deployment purpose only, so need your clarification on this point please, I’m afraid of duplicating effort.
  2. For technical positions, any overlap to dydx development team especially for TPL position. I do believe creating technical documentation, SDKs and contributing to code should be initialized by dydx development team first, no need of hiring new one.
  3. For the cost, should we wait for more details about hardware specification from the team for each service component before jumping in any detail?
  4. In general, I do believe just Indexer/Validator/Full node can be deployed by 3rd team atm, to do that each team should need 1-2 devops or SREs only + 1 operator lead, other positions are wasteful imo. Or we can better start with minimum before scaling out instead of requesting over-budget based on lots of assumption like this.

Thank you,


The new team at the head of the operations DAO is a plus.
Our team appreciate Callen and Joana’s careful editing of this DRC.

The Ops Subdao’s request for financing has our full backing.

  • The Ops dao, which will be a crucial part of the Version 4 DYDX ecosystem, needs an 18 month runway to function consistently.

  • We haven’t seen an external audit in the DAO sector yet, and we think it send a clear message of thoroughness. and would be a big step forward to compete with CeFi platforms, who have only recently incorporated external audits.

  • Even while we think the personnel projections are modest, we are okay with them for a start and think the Ops dao will be transparent about spendings. We feel at ease using an initial estimate and making adjustments as we go.

  • Infrastructure and technology expenditures appear huge, but we support a substantial budget that is rigorously and honestly controlled. We’d want to begin by putting our faith in the next OPS dao squad.

We will back this financing proposal throughout its governance process.


Thanks Joanna and Callen for crafting this subDao proposal.
We support involving community members as trustees and enforcers, a concrete step towards strengthening shared governance and enhancing security measures. Additionally, the inclusion of an external auditor is a significant move, integral to maintaining the transparency and accountability of the DOT.
The proposal effectively presents a clear pathway for the launch of dYdX V4, laying a firm groundwork for a fully decentralized and successful operation.
Chaos Labs is excited about the evolution of the DOT, and we are eager to assist in any capacity needed to augment its work and the eventual growth of dYdX.



Thank you, Joanna and Callen, for the well-thought-out proposal. It makes a lot of sense to have two technical roles in order to run the indexer and deploy the front-ends seamlessly. This will help kickstart the decentralization of the protocol. I like the idea of auditing the DAO, as there have been disputes in the past. Having an independent third-party review the books and on-chain transactions will provide the community with peace of mind. The increase in the number of trustees is very welcome. With this change, I would like to take the opportunity to express my interest in becoming a trustee of the dYdX Operations Trust. Allow me to share a brief introduction about myself:

I first learned about crypto in early 2017. The space back then, as it is now, was full of scams, and centralized exchanges were either being hacked or were running away with customer funds. If you liked margin trading, the number of “secure” exchanges was very limited, and the fees to keep margin positions open were exorbitant. However, in late 2019, I came across dYdX. Compared to most exchanges, dYdX was self-custodial, which eliminated the risk of fund mismanagement or theft. There was even a lend/borrow pool available where you could earn interest, which was quite neat. The exchange was perfect for me, I had both self-custody and could keep positions open for weeks/months. In early 2020, I joined the official Discord server, you can find my history under userID:


V3 came along and with that a lot of attention. dYdX was ahead of the curve and swiftly positioned itself as a DEX behemoth (though a semi-DEX would be a more accurate description). I consider myself fortunate to have qualified for the top-tier airdrop of +9.5k DYDX. I have actively engaged in governance and advocated for reducing trading rewards as well as getting more of the dYdX ecosystem on-chain. You can review my activity here:

Having a background in finance and accounting, including accounts payable, could be beneficial as a trustee, considering that reviewing and approving outgoing payments is part of the responsibilities. I would be happy to share best practices and contribute to streamlining this process.

Thank you for taking the time to read through all of this and considering me as a potential trustee. If you have any questions, please feel free to DM me here or on Discord.


Hey! After reading DIP 18 - dYdX Operations subDAO and dYdX Operations subDAO V2 few thoughts came to my mind. Firstly, the perfectly written proposals. It’s clear that the proposals were put together by experienced people, and everything is clear and constructive. The following questions also came up:

  1. Why is the mandate requested for 18 months and not six as for the first mandate?
  2. The quantity of Administration is increased by 40%, at the same time the compensation is also increased by 30%. I always support the increase of compensation, but it would be nice if it was justified in the proposal itself. I can’t conclude are you asking a lot or not enough. Immutablelawyer writes that it is not enough, perhaps it really is.
    I would also add specific success metrics for the Key results section, if possible. For example Administration - Key results - “Improve communication from the OPS subDAO and community engagement” - success metrics are unclear here I think.
  3. In the “Abstract” and “Context and Motivation” sections, there are duplicates of the phrase “On December 19, 2022, the proposal 3 to create the DOT as a dYdX subDAO passed, and 225,000 DYDX were transferred from the dYdX community treasury to fund the DOT’s operations during an initial 6-month term” and "On May 15, 2023, the dYdX Foundation posted, “Exploring the dYdX Operations subDAO’s near future”. I think it is better to avoid duplication or to paraphrase. In “Looking Ahead: DOT 2.0” section the phrase "On 15 May 2023, the dYdX Foundation posted, “Exploring the dYdX Operations subDAO’s near future” repeated again.

P.S. I also want to point out straight away that there may already be answers to my questions in the proposal, but I may have read it inattentively or missed something, so please forgive me in advance if this is the case.
I also hope that some of my comments will help improve the proposal.


This is a great proposal, appreciate all the detail.

But, why are DYDX tokens being requested from treasury, presumably to then be sold?
Instead, should this SubDAO be capitalized by DYDX Trading Inc with revenue it’s collected from V3?

$27m in fees were paid to the company in Q1. The company has accomplished so much over the years(!) - but is there a plan for whatever revenue’s not been spent?


Hey, @dYdX_Ops_subDAO (Joanna, Callen) - thanks for your continued support of dYdX’s Operation SubDAO.

Great to see an update and a plan for a more resilient future.

At a quick read, it seems reasonable; the scope hopes to captivate more users and distribute control of critical aspects of a protocol’s growth and function; front-end hosting, indexing, and mobile solutions.

For the ongoing banking application, this seems to be important:

One of the rare times in DAOs where a larger request may result in positive outcomes.

I’m glad to hear of the included scope for an outside auditor; if done correctly, it may instill more trust and accountability within the community.

We’ve advised these discussions before for other DAOs and would happily facilitate intros.

I’m also writing this to express my interest in becoming a trustee.

Have experience in large DAOs, serving on multi-sigs and overseeing operations, plus my job requires me to be near a wallet full-time. Thanks to the community for any future consideration!


Hi everyone,

First of all, we are really happy to see that our proposal meets the community’s expectations. We are also extremely grateful for the detailed and constructive feedback and requests for clarification that you have provided. We have collated these and shared our responses below. Please feel free to follow up with any further questions or input!

Given the overall positive response, we hope to move to a snapshot vote by Wednesday 31st of May, 2023, to approve the budget.

We are beginning talks with potential trustees, and will present the candidates we select in a subsequent proposal to gather community feedback, before moving to a snapshot vote to confirm the onboarding of new trustees if the feedback is overall positive.

(31/5/23) Edit: Please note that trustees and enforces can be added by the consent of community members (DYDX holders) through both an off-chain (Snapshot) vote or on-chain vote.

Thanks again for all your input here, we look forward to any further feedback on the below points and hope to see many of you in the upcoming AMA in Discord this Tuesday!

Please see your questions and our responses below:

Why an 18 month commitment?

We believe an 18-month commitment is needed to attract top-tier talent but also ensure there is solid development progress within the Operations subDAO. The longer the term, the higher the job security for applicants. We agree that performance evaluation is particularly important given the longer term, which is why we look forward to engaging an external auditor.

The Operations Lead will naturally also be tasked with providing ongoing evaluation and reporting of their own work and the activities of DOT. The enforcer will also play a part in this by ensuring there is a high level of transparency and communication with the community coming from DOT, and we hope that the community itself will continue to play an important role in setting high standards for accountability and providing feedback on where communication can be improved!

Onboarding contributors as trustees or independent contractors?

The Operations Lead, Technical Project Lead, and Site Reliability Engineer are not required to be Trustees and will be onboarded as Independent Contractors. However, Joanna and I agree that it makes the most sense to have the Operations Lead as a Trustee similar to the current setup with Reverie. The Operations Lead will be responsible for a variety of ongoing tasks such as payments and setting up relevant infrastructure. Without them as a Trustee, there will be a higher operational burden on other Trustees as well as restrict their ability to deal with any legal matters pertaining to DOT.

Trustee compensation: Too high or too low?

While Trustees play an important role within DOT, most of the heavy lifting will be done by the Operations Lead. From our experience, we believe the current compensation for Trustees is adequate. Trustees are required to provide active oversight of the Trust and ensure that its purpose is being carried out. In the case of the dYdX Operations subDAO this means, but is not limited to:

  • Providing relevant documentation when needed by the Operations Lead.
  • Assisting with multi-sig transactions in a timely manner.
  • Ensuring that all independent contractors are fulfilling their respective mandates in line with the dYdX Operations Trust (DOT), and stepping in if this may not be the case.

We appreciate the community’s willingness to increase Trustee compensation, however, we do want to be conscious of its cost to the DAO with our understanding of what’s typically required as a Trustee. To add to this, the proposed Trustee compensation amount which has increased from $1500 to $2000 from DOT 1.0 reflects the expected increase in workload for Trustees over the 18 months.

Industry benchmarks for compensation for new hires

This is a great question, ultimately we tried to find a good balance between providing competitive compensation and managing uncertainty. When comparing dYdX to MakerDAO, Lido, and Sushi, these DAOs have been operating under a very decentralized structure for many years that have allowed them to iterate and improve based on experience and feedback. These DAOs also receive protocol income which is used to offset spending in their native token and provides more stability for their contributors. This is very different in our case.

Once you take into consideration DYDX token compensation for the advertised positions, we believe our compensation is fairly competitive:

  • Operations Lead: Total Comp = $100k-$130k (USDC) + 20k-30k DYDX ( $40k-$60k) = $140k-$190k
  • Technical Project Manager: Total Comp = $130k-$160k (USDC) + 30k-40k DYDX ($60k-$80k) = $190k-$240k
  • Site Reliability Engineer: Total Comp = $130k-$160k (USDC) + 30k-40k DYDX ($60k-$80k) = $190k-$240k

*Based on a $2 DYDX Price

Detailing the tech stack for DOT applicants

Tech Stack for the SRE Role:

Based on our initial thoughts, knowledge of javascript + python + go + typescript would be preferable, and evidence of this will need to be shown through an interview process. What this fully consists of is yet to be decided, and will likely have some live technical assessment to deem competency fully. We will seek support from other stakeholders in the dYdX ecosystem to aid in this interview process.

Tech Stack for TPL Role:

As discussed in the JD the main requirement is that the TPL is able to effectively review code in GO and Solidity.

Some nice to haves include anything that will enable this person to succeed (but not required), is a deeper understanding of the tech stack for the indexer and tech stack for deploying the front-end, specifically:

  • AWS
    • ECS - Fargate
    • RDS - Postgres Database
    • EC2
    • Lambda
    • ElastiCache Redis
    • EC2 ELB - Loadbalancer
    • Cloudwatch - Logs
    • Secret Manager
  • Terraform Cloud - for deploying to the cloud
  • Bugsnag - bug awareness
  • Datadog - metrics and monitoring
  • Pagerduty - alerting
  • Experience programming in Python, Java, C++, or C

In general, tech stacks for these two positions need to align with the architecture of V4 described by dYdX Trading.

dYdX Trading released the following blog post about the V4 architecture: v4 Technical Architecture Overview - dYdX. “dYdX will open source the front-end codebase and associated deployment scripts.” We do not see the initial deployment and maintenance of the respective front-ends as duplicative. Rather, we think the Ops subDAO’s efforts with respect to the front-ends will ensure that the potential launch of dYdX V4 on mainnet is successful.

Sourcing and vetting applicants

“Try promoting it through official dYdX channels on platforms like CT and dedicated job boards such as Bankless DAO and She256. Furthermore, has any thought been given to implementing a referral program for these important roles? The main goal is to create greater awareness and potentially attract a larger talent pool to apply and migrate to the dYdX Ecosystem.

Given the potential 18-month contract, please consider incorporating a 2 or 3-stage interview phase. In the later stages, challenge potential candidates to undertake a suitable task to demonstrate their required competency.

Incentivization - If possible, please consider offering a mix of tokens and USD as part of the job incentive. I suggest locking the tokens for a set period of time.” - MoMo, via Discord

Since the proposal went up, we have received a number of high quality applicants already. All three jobs have been shared on Twitter in a thread by dgog. We are currently looking at options for posting on popular crypto job boards as well. We would love it if community members could promote these three roles in their own networks, either by retweeting David’s thread or sharing the link to our workable page (dYdX Operations Trust - Current Openings). In future, a referral program could be an interesting community project to explore, please reach out to Joanna on Discord if you have ideas for this.

We definitely agree that a rigorous vetting process is essential to find the right candidates for these 18 month contracts! We have since defined a multi-stage vetting process for all three roles we are hiring for, including a take-home task and live technical assessment for the two technical roles. We will also be sharing documentation of the hiring process with the community for transparency purposes once the new contributors are in place.

As described in the budget breakdown table, we have allocated a portion of DYDX tokens that will not be converted to USDC and will be used as an incentive on top of salary for each desired role. We can’t comment on the exact breakdown due to market volatility and our budget constraint, but we are targeting:

  • Operations Lead: 20k-30k DYDX
  • Technical Project Lead: 30k-40k DYDX
  • Site Reliability Engineer: 30k-40k DYDX

Note: these DYDX token compensation packages are for the full 18 months.

Allocating budget for future hiring needs

This is a great point. For now we feel that the budget, including the buffer, would be sufficient for the planned scope for the next 18 months. However, as we all know, plans can change. In a scenario where additional hires for DOT are deemed necessary, we would inform the community with a revised plan of how the budget would be used. If we see that the buffer would be exceeded, the budget timeline could potentially be shortened e.g. from 18 months to 14 months, and a request for further funding would take place at the end of that shortened period. In a scenario where the full budget is not used during the 18 month period, all remaining funds will be returned to the dYdX Treasury.

We hope that our responses have sufficiently answered these questions and look forward to discussing this further in the AMA!

Thanks, Joanna and Callen.


Hi everyone,

Joanna and I have submitted the Snapshot here: Snapshot

Voting starts shortly!

Thanks again to the community for their engagement, it is very much appreciated


I wanted to share my voting decision on the proposal to request $6.6M of funding for the dYdX Operations subDAO. After carefully considering the proposal and its potential impact on the dYdX ecosystem, I have decided to vote YES.

The proposed funding will enable the OPS subDAO to operate for the next 18 months and prepare the dYdX DAO for the launch of dYdX V4. The planned recruitment of key roles, such as Operations Lead, Technical Project Lead, and Site Reliability Engineer, will strengthen the subDAO and ensure technical support for the future. Additionally, engaging a third-party auditor and increasing the number of trustees on the multi-sig will enhance transparency and accountability.

I believe this proposal aligns with the goals of the dYdX community and supports the growth and development of the protocol. By voting YES, we can provide the necessary resources for the OPS subDAO to thrive and contribute to the success of the dYdX ecosystem.


Great justification. It’s great to see you kickstart the process of providing insights behind the voting decision. Hopefully, others continue in this direction.


Thanks for the well-though-out proposal and for taking the time to answer the question Joanna and Callen (@dYdX_Ops_subDAO). I don’t want to repeat the things mentioned above but I share the positive thoughts on the potential impact of DOT for the dYdX DAO and the dYdY ecosystem.

Voted in favour of the proposal.

On top I would like to volunteer being a trustee in the new setup. Let me quickly introduce myself. I’m Chris from Berlin working in product at Safe https://app.safe.global/. More specifically on the user facing interfaces, i.e. Safe{Wallet}. On top, I’m an active voter in dYdX governance (and a token holder :slight_smile:; if you are interested you can see my voting behaviour here).

I think my experience in working daily on a multi-sig wallet in the context of Safe DAO and an established other legal entity of Safe in Germany (setup similar to the dYdX setup) on top of the dYdX governance experiences would make me a good fit for a trustee position.


Hey dYdX, As a new forum member, I truly loved your inclusive proposal that included every detail! This is such a good move in favor of transparency. In the end, I think it’s appropriate, and OPS subDAO must have a good budget. I hope DOT will be as successful as we expect.


New proposal alert! As the delegation team, we examined dYdX’s new proposal “Launch dYdX Operations subDAO V2”, and decided to vote in favor of it. Here’s why the proposal requests the dYdX community treasury on behalf of the dYdX Operations Trust (DOT). These funds will contribute to OPS subDAO’s operations for an additional 18 months. Before diving into the details, let’s explain DOT and the dYdX subDAO structure.

SubDAOs are minor DAO splits created for more decentralized dYdX governance. To lighten the governance load of the dYdX DAO, there are two subDAOs: one for the dYdX Grants Program and the other for dYdX Operations.

This proposal is about the OPS subDAO and their governance term "DOT,” which was first launched on December 19, 2022. DOT is responsible for leading the operations and the technical project as well as V4 mainnet engineering. We want DOT to continue as DOT 2.0 because of its improvements for dYdX.

As stated, DOT 2.0 aims to provide transparency and openness to the community. We reviewed the detailed budget plan presented by trustees Joanna and Callen. Upon successful dYdX V4 mainnet deployment, the subDAO will need additional engineers and vendors to operate the key components.

Another important aspect of the proposal is that OPS is planning changes for current security measures to provide security. This will be accomplished by increasing the number of trustees from 3 to 5 and changing the enforcers. Thereafter, funds in the multi-sig wallet can be used by trustees.

In conclusion, we believe it’s prudent to be prepared for the potential mainnet launch of dYdX V4 and ensure the subDAO’s future readiness. We support this increased transparency and view the team expansion positively. For these reasons, we vote ‘for’.

We also thank trustees Joanna and Callen for making such a clear and detailed proposal on budget management and answer every question in dYdX governance forum.