New v4 Governance (council) Structure and Plan

Hey Kagan,

Thanks for the proposal above - will share my thoughts hereunder:

Firstly, the call with Matt was very informative and provided a lot of insight into the history of Synthetix, its evolution over time (from a governance perspective and legal perspective), and the lessons learned along the way. I personally think that calls like these with members from other protocols will be very beneficial in spearheading future efforts for the dYdX Ecosystem and, most importantly, increasing the community’s knowledge-base in regard to certain topics so that we are all well-equipped to discuss, propose and vote on future proposals in relation to pivotal areas within the protocol (a recap can be found here: Recap: Call w/Matt Losquadro from Synthetix re. Governance).

Secondly, I am personally not a fan of copying other protocols’ mechanics lock stock and barrel. Were this to be the case, there would be no legal or technical innovation with regard to implementing and adopting governance frameworks that are protocol-specific and community-specific. Different protocols necessitate different governance frameworks and different communities also necessitate different governance frameworks.

Thirdly, when you think about it, we already do have this framework in place and thus, what would this proposal really change? We have a Grants Trust (you can call it a committee, council, SubDAO - the name is irrelevant as it’s substance over form), we have an Ops Trust, we will have a Treasury Management Trust, Growth Trust, Risk Management Trust etc. (naturally the entity-type may change should there be some legislative changes within the jurisdiction that affect the operations thereof, however, thus far this structure has worked provided the functions of a Trust do not breach the laws of the jurisdiction, namely VASP Laws).

As I previously stated, what we should be doing is evaluating these calls and taking on the lessons learned from other protocols. Following that call, we should be discussing quadratic voting (its risks, pros and cons and whether it would be ideal for dYdX to implement), the Synthetix technical architecture in relation to not offering a front-end itself (ties into the front-end decentralization efforts being spearheaded by Ops - how can we improve, optimise and progressively decentralize this layer of our tech-stack?), introducing accountability metrics (ties into what Matt mentioned re. council/committee member inactivity), so on and so forth.

I do not deem the above proposal to be productive in nature as it would not change much aside from renaming what we already have or are intending to have in place.