Eden Chief Delegate Proposal 18/12/22

The Chief Delegates (Chris, Jesse, Xavier, Reiki, Waxa) recently conducted their 10th Weekly Meeting which you can watch in full down below, the purpose of this blog is to highlight the proposed changes before they are made. To see how consensus was formed by all CD's please enjoy the 2-hour discussion.

Here’s a recap from the last CD call:

- We came to consensus on a modified funding model where we plan to pull from the Treasury into the OpEx account. We plan to propose a new Bylaw that stipulates expectations on how CDs should administer funds from the account. This means expressing explicit intent on the initiative that a transfer outside of the OpEx account is funding. Also, documenting funding milestones if the initiative exceeds a certain dollar value. For example, the current CDs plan on jumpstarting 3 language EDENs (more details soon). Because there is nothing in the Bylaws that prevent pulling from the Treasury today, we can do this in the current term based on the feedback we are getting in and outside of EDEN. It is rare to find an initiative with such widespread support. Therefore we feel comfortable with this planned action.

- If the OpEx account is used to fund initiatives that have CD consensus, the current CDs have agreed we can lower the distribution rate to 5%. This solves a problem that some L1s who get funded from the distribution rate is a low ROI action for EDEN on EOS as a whole, as expressed through unclaimed funds statistics and lack of colloquial participation. In this model, L1s or other EDEN members can petition the CDs directly to get their initiative funded, regardless of possible “bad luck” in the election.

- We plan on creating an msig to request funding from the ENF. We would like to gauge the ENF’s support of the direction we are taking EDEN, among other goals like the ability to expand EDEN initiatives and incentives that come from increased funding. The next set of CDs can use their response as a signal to select their own path.

- We agreed that funding two distinct membership paths is a valuable future initiative. One high membership fee in order to influence EDEN governance (advancing past Round 1). One low membership fee to get sybil checked. This would solve the issue of the latter’s members potentially capturing/manipulating the system in a way that is not in the best interest of EDEN on EOS (most will likely come from outside EOS). We have previously discussed a global induction limit and/or a code change that new members’ vote do not count towards consensus. We believe having two membership paths is the optimal solution so to not prevent a waitlist for users coming for EDEN’s unique sybil checking service. This still may constitute a code change that a vote does not count towards consensus (and cannot receive votes).

The new funding model was proposed by Rieki ⚡️. We would like to emphasize that none of the above has been executed. We are open to feedback from all vantage points. To conclude, we would like to thank all the election participants who voted us to the CD position. Go EDEN and go EOS!

To continue conversation, please reach out to the CD's on Eden Members Telegram.

Eden updates straight into
your inbox

Sign up for Eden updates.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.