Idea for Proposing a Cardano Improvement Proposal

Hi,

I’m seeking feedback on an idea for proposing a Cardano Improvement Proposal (GitHub - cardano-foundation/CIPs).

In general terms as a starting point for discussion, the CIP would propose a process change empowering IOG and Cardano Foundation employees with discretionary ADA to delegate to stake pools. In other words, the process change would make ADA available to each IOG and Cardano Foundation employee for delegation to one or more stake pools based on the judgement of the individual employee.

If the idea seems to resonate with some in the community, then after allowing some time for discussion I will prepare a draft proposal.

@ParadoxicalSphere although it makes sense to discuss your idea here, what you are proposing is beyond the scope of the CIP framework. You can verify this for yourself at the link you quoted (in the GitHub repo’s top level README.md… boldface is my own emphasis):

  • CIPs do not represent a commitment of any form towards existing projects.
  • … they are a collection of sensible and sound solutions to common problems within the Cardano ecosystem.

You can look further into CIP-0001 itself which describes the CIP Process in greater detail: there is actually no CIP type (Standards, Process, or Informational) that matches what you are describing… mainly because your suggestion is organisational & social rather than technical: :face_with_monocle:

2 Likes

I suppose you don’t want the ADA themselves given to the employees, just the power to decide on IOG’s and CF’s delegations distributed to individuals?

Because you don’t like their policies on how it is done at the moment? And you think individuals would do it better (for some value of “better”)?

Which employees? All? Down to the facility management (if they have any)?

And, while it’s also cumbersome to discuss delegation policies with them at the moment, it is at least possible. With the power distributed to individuals, specifically to do as they like, it is hardly open for debate at all, anymore.

Hi,

Thanks to @COSDpool and @HeptaSean for offering feedback so far. I will offer responses to some of the concerns in an effort to try and build informal consensus.

...what you are proposing is beyond the scope of the CIP framework... there is... no CIP type... that matches what you are describing... mainly because your suggestion is organizational and social rather than technical

CIP1 provides the following description of Process CIPs:

A Process CIP describes a process surrounding Cardano, or proposes a change to (or an event in) a process. Process CIPs are like Standards Track CIPs but apply to areas other than the Cardano protocol itself. They may propose an implementation, but not to Cardano's codebase; they often require community consensus; unlike Informational CIPs, they are more than recommendations, and users are typically not free to ignore them. Examples include procedures, guidelines, changes to the decision-making process, and changes to the tools or environment used in Cardano development.

IOG and Cardano Foundation (CF) currently use a decision-making process to decide delegations to stake pools. I see no indication in the above description that Process CIPs must be completely technical in nature, or that organizational processes are intended to be excluded from the CIP process.

[CIPs] are a collection of sensible and sound solutions to common problems within the Cardano ecosystem

Governance is an issue that concerns and affects everyone in the Cardano ecosystem. The Cardano roadmap highlights the importance of governance for the future of Cardano Voltaire - Cardano Roadmap

I suppose you don’t want the ADA themselves given to the employees, just the power to decide on IOG’s and CF’s delegations distributed to individuals?

Yes. That is the idea.

Because you don’t like their policies on how it is done at the moment? And you think individuals would do it better (for some value of “better”)?

Empowering employees to delegate some meaningful amount of ADA to stake pools at their individual discretion would serve to increase agility and decentralization of decision making surrounding stake pool delegations that IOG and Cardano Foundation may make. The impact of such an initiative on any existing IOG and CF delegation strategies would need to be carefully explored. Theoretically, a scenario exists were introducing such an initiative does not change existing delegation strategies that IOG and CF may currently practice at all. A scenario also exists where employees empowered to delegate some ADA do not exercise their delegations at all, so that the current delegation ecosystem stays exactly the same.

Which employees? All? Down to the facility management (if they have any)?

The question would need to be explored in greater detail in the process of clarifying details of the CIP.

While it's also cumbersome to discuss delegation details with them at the moment, it is at least possible.

Yes, communication between the community, and employees of IOG and CF is limited.

With the power distributed to individuals, specifically to do as they like, it is hardly open for debate at all, anymore.

Employees are not random strangers. Employees are under contract with their employer, fulfilling responsibilities based on terms of employment. IOG, CF, their respective employees, and the SPO community share a common interest in achieving Cardano’s success.

Let’s keep the conversation going.

That governance is about operation of the Cardano ecosystem itself – protocol parameters, protocol changes, distribution of the treasury funds, operation of Catalyst, …

The ADA used by IOG and CF for their delegation programs are a totally different beast. They were given to them in the very beginning and are now owned by them. Their boards can freely decide what to do with them and that is not subject to community governance.

What you are proposing ought to be a proposal to the boards of IOG and CF, not to the Cardano community as a whole.

3 Likes

Hi @HeptaSean, please give sources so these rules may be included in the discussion.

For what exactly?

2 Likes

Hi,

I need to amend the idea to also include the employees of EMURGO (https://emurgo.vc/)

In addition to the numerous reasons already given why this imposition of bureaucracy would be undesirable, and why it could not be implemented as a CIP in any case, there’d be the additional threat of increased regulatory exposure (specifically. individuals’ decisions influencing company investment plans) which schemes like this would make even worse :worried:

1 Like

Hi @HeptaSean,

Thank you very much for taking the time and making the effort to gather resources describing current IOG, CF and Emurgo delegation funding models. The information is very helpful. I will review the links carefully.

Submitting the CIP would give the people responsible for the documents that you have cited an opportunity to respond to the idea.

CIPs are supposed to be about “the Cardano network, its processes, or environment”... Seems nobody has written explicitly that this does not include deciding about the wallets of specific entities.

I would propose that the idea is about the Cardano network, processes and environment pertaining to governance.

The CIP process seems to be written broadly enough to invite rather than exclude ideas.

Partly, as one possible outcome, I wonder whether the CIP process may change as a result of the conversation that I have started. The CIP process changing in response to my idea would be a very, very sad day for Cardano, I believe. For example, in terms of morale, if the CIP process changes to stop such an idea from being proposed, then members of the community may conclude that IOG, the Cardano Foundation and Emurgo have little confidence in the community’s processes for developing consensus. Rough consensus in the community is required for a CIP to become active. Also, employees may conclude that their employer has little confidence in their abilities to work responsibly. I believe in the capability of IOG, Cardano Foundation and Emurgo employees to act responsibly and make decisions in the best interests of Cardano. After all, without IOG, Cardano Foundation, Emurgo and their respective employees, there would be no Cardano for the us in the community to appreciate.

The CIP process draws heavily on Bitcoin’s BIP process (bips/bip-0002.mediawiki at master · bitcoin/bips · GitHub) so I believe that history is on my side.

I appreciate your critical feedback. I believe that enough of a question exists related to what may be a very important topic of conversation to at least seek clarification from CIP Editors, which would require submitting the CIP.

Hi @COSDpool

individuals’ decisions influencing company investment plans

You seem angry and afraid. Take a breath. I can understand your fear if I consider a worst-case scenario in an implementation of the idea where employees are given discretion over too much ADA. I agree that any such initiative would need to be carefully balanced. As I already said previously today, I believe in the potential of IOG, Cardano Foundation, Emurgo and their respective employees.

I will review the link that you posted about Ethereum after the merge. Taken at face value however, I am concerned about engaging in long open-ended discussions at the current phase of the idea, considering that the article seems not to focus directly on Cardano.

I am open to questions about the idea.

I would also encourage talking with each other about the idea.