[BIP-006] The First Brick 🧱


Status: WIP

Co-Authors: @Halstead a.k.a MillionBear, @n00bleLAND, @drmsxmchns.eth, @aBinaryMind, @thatguytrey @DefiJesus @BuzzedMo

Created: 09/09/21
Requires: BIP-006
Snapshot Vote: 01/10/2021

1.0 - Summary:

The proposal set forth here will define an organisational structure for the BBH. Designed with inspiration from the Index Coop, a proven and tested method of decentralised governance. This proposal will define the parameters for different working interest groups and their powers in relation to the BBH community and its resources.

2.0 - Abstract:

The proposed change is to introduce titles for new working groups and broadly define their powers and responsibilities within the BBH community. If implemented, this proposal will lead to the creation of an official hierarchy, providing Bears with the structure and process they need to push forward their ideas. The proposed hierarchy is represented in this rudimentary figure below:

(if somebody with artistic skills and time could produce a high-quality illustrated version of this, that would be a fantastic resource for BBH marketing)

3.0 - Motivation:

As a community we have been bursting out with valuable and credible ideas that have the potential to further the BBH DAO. Unfortunately, it is rare that these ideas are followed through with. A large reason for this is that motivated community members lack the guidance and defined processes and procedures necessary to make their voices and ideas heard. This diminishes the effectiveness of the DAO and impedes upon our ability to accomplish community goals.


4.0 - Specification Overview:

What it is that the proposal will do to solve the problem will be detailed in this section.


4.1 – Groups & Roles:

This is where the proposed working groups are defined and labelled.

[Click on the drop down for more details on Groups & Roles]

Summary

Nests & Drone Bees:
A completely free and independent group of motivated individuals called Nests. Individual members can form Nests to work on anything they believe will further the interests of the community. The fundamental differentiation here from Hives is that Nests are NOT endorsed by the Colony. Meaning there will be no funds or resources granted to these groups unless or until they become Hives.

Hives & Worker Bees:
This group will be fundamental to driving some of the most important community initiatives such as marketing and investments. Hives can only be formed by explicit consent from the Colony. This is done by making a very well-constructed proposal to the community. When a Hive is formed it is on a quarterly probation period. The Colony decides at the end of this period if it is worthy of continuing via a fresh community vote.

The Colony:
As we are a decentralised community, and our goal is to become increasingly decentralised, it is important that this role is defined. The Colony is the community at large, each one of you comes together to form the BBH Colony. The Colony and its members act as the gatekeepers. They protect the HoneyPot and BBH resources from nefarious, ill-considered, or simply clumsy initiatives.

Powers and resources granted to Hives can ONLY be granted by the Colony. Meaning the location of power remains decentralised.


4.2 – Responsibilities:

In this section, the minimum requirements from newly formed groups are detailed. Please note that these will be non-negotiable requirements. All groups/roles will be required to operate in accordance with one simple principle:


Growth & Improvement: Whatever the goals are for your group, they must be designed to further the financial, strategic, or social interests of the BBH community and its members.


[Click on the drop down for more details on Responsibilities]

Summary

Nests:
Nests don’t have many responsibilities. This is the benefit that is derived from being unendorsed. If you have an idea that you think could work, have at it. Form a Nest of people who are interested in progressing your idea and work together to achieve them. You are still entitled to retroactive remuneration as detailed in section 4.4. If the time comes that your Nest feels in need of community resources, make a proposal to become a Hive. The Colony will decide if your group is viable.

Minimum Requirements:

  1. The objectives of Nests should be defined at the outset.

  2. Must not conduct themselves in a way that would harm the reputation of the BBH.


Hives:
This is where responsibility becomes much more important. Hives will be formed with the intention of utilising HoneyPot funds and BBH resources to achieve important goals. Therefore, they are answerable to the community.

Minimum Requirements:

  1. Key performance indicators (KPIs): These must be determined within the initial proposal. The Colony will then measure the Hives performance over their first quarter against those KPIs. Using this information, the Colony votes to continue or end the group.

  2. Objectives: The goals and objectives of Hives must be very clearly defined within the initial proposal.

  3. Size: A Hive must consist of at least three members to ensure that checks and balances exist to protect the community interest.

  4. Conflicting Interest: Hives must be careful to ensure their goals are not conflicting with the goals of other existing hives.

  5. Funding: The expected costs and funding required must be carefully considered and included in the proposal. The community would decide based on the quality of your proposal if the amount specified is justified.

  6. MultiSig: For a Hive group to function and steward the BBH community funds, it is an essential requirement at the proposal phase for members to create and evidence a multi-signatory wallet on Gnosis Safe. It is crucial that spending of community funds is mutually agreed between the Hive members.

  7. Reputation: Members of Hives must also refrain from conducting themselves in a manner that would damage the reputation of the BBH.


The Colony:

Imposing requirements on the community seems ridiculous because you’re all Chads with alpha brains. There should however be a few moral requirements that protect the wider interests of the community:

  1. Solicitation of Votes: There should be absolutely no efforts to pay or court any individual within the community to vote in your own interest or the interests of others. Votes should remain the result of an individual’s thoughts.

  2. Fracturing: All efforts should be made to maintain the integrity of our community. If a significant rift should form between different interest groups, there should be a concerted community effort to bring those groups back together around shared ideals [a community code or goals should maybe form another proposal].


4.3 - Limits & Power:

The powers and the limits of those powers granted to Hives must be adequately defined within the initial proposal. Any plans to significantly alter or expand these powers must be done so following a community approval vote. Failure to do so may result in the immediate disbanding of said group following a community vote.

Additionally, the Colony retains the right to end any working group at any time following the success of a community vote, irrespective of circumstances.

4.4 - Remuneration:

All members that form a Hive are entitled to retroactive remuneration for their work and services to the BBH community. Detailed logs should be taken for time worked and the details of the work they have done. This work will be assessed for its impact to the BBH and appropriate remuneration will be distributed based upon that assessment.

At present remuneration is handled by the Motherland (founding team). In the future however as we develop we would look to establish a remuneration hive that handles these claims and sets the framework for remuneration. If you believe you are suitable for this role, the team are always looking for trustworthy and competent members to hand over responsibility to.


5.0 - Rationale:

The proposal has been made in this way because as a DAO we must protect ourselves from irresponsible use of community resources. After much consideration and discussion between the proposal team and even further conversation with our defi experts; we decided that a tiered group system enabling less restrictive oversight, but greater resource protection would be the ideal structure. This method would encourage more considered proposals that wish to utilise our resources but should also prevent voter fatigue from incessant, half-baked proposals.

Initially our proposal was a much more rigid structure with a single working group (a committee). It was designed to establish rules for the formation of committees and their election processes. Due to the reasons discussed above, it was decided this wouldn’t be an effective long-term solution.


6.0 - Technical Specification:

Technical changes resulting from this proposal should involve:

  1. Codifying the new structure and proposed governance of said structure within official BBH documents found here: https://docs.buzzedbearhideout.com/.

  2. Newly formed working groups should be assigned groups on the BBH forum.

  3. A Discord channel that allows community members to seek out others for the formation of Nests & Hives.


7.0 - Test Cases:

A similar model of decentralised governance has been successfully tested and implemented at the Index Coop. A successful FTSE 500 organisation.


8.0 - Copyright:

Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.


19 Likes

Sounds good. Thanks for the thorough summary.

3 Likes

I think we are on the right path! very structured. Good work team.

3 Likes

Thanks for putting together this thoughtful proposal fellow bears! There is little to be said about the structure of it as it closely follows a proven method of DAO management.

I think one thing I’m not totally on board with here is the names of the groups as the current ones do not provide much clarity and are easily forgotten/confused. I can’t think of any better ones right now but perhaps this is something that can be brainstormed a bit.

The most important piece to this proposal that members may miss at a glance is the fact that the BBH community as a whole, through proposals the DAO votes on is the central pillar and key holder of this structure. This allows for smaller working groups (hives) to have some autonomy to get things done, while limiting their power to what the community is willing to give them. Pretty big brain.

My favorite part of this concept is the use of gnosis safe within the working groups (hives) to ensure that a single member never has full control over the resources allocated to them and at least has to have the other members of that group in agreeance with any moves made.

I think one risk that should be considered about this and all future proposals is the history of low community participation within DAOs in general. Additionally, as with any crypto project before this (especially when the token is a relatively low fiat cost), there is always a risk of any one individual gathering up enough of the given token and using that to manipulate the system. In this case, if an individual were to quietly acquire over 1000 bears to meet the quorum, and there was low enough community participation, they could theoretically force a proposal through themselves that was not in the best interest of all of us. Thankfully the motherland team can prevent this from happening right now, but I will feel more comfortable about this when there is a larger spread of participating hodlers.

Truly appreciate all of the authors’ diligence in presenting this proposal. If this went to vote right now I would be in favor.

:v:

4 Likes

I agree. Share the bears!

-Nests & Drone Bees:

are they allowed to use bear likeness in marketing on these trials?

also: Reputation: Members of Hives must also refrain from conducting themselves in a manner that would damage the reputation of the BBH.

-When a Hive is formed it is on a quarterly probation review period. The Colony decides at the end of this period if it is worthy of continuing via a fresh community vote.

So this implies that every hive has at least 1 qtr of runway?

RETROACTIVE RENUMERATION : how would this be determined. I would think 1 standard fee for picked projects? Not fair, but what is…

mostly just good stuff. we should take this to the next step

1 Like

Hey! Yes, we think that hives should be voted in with a 3 month term. At the end of each term a fresh vote determines if they stay in or are disbanded.

With regards to remuneration, it is a complicated topic that many people are likely to have thoughts on. We wanted to stay away from suggesting anything on this front. Details surrounding payments should be put forward by a treasury Hive for the community to agree on.

We propose that payments are paid retroactively as this is how Index Coop runs and it seems to work. It also means we aren’t throwing out HoneyPot funds to every person that thinks they can get something done. Payment for work achieved. Care should be taken to make sure this is fair and doesn’t discourage people from contributing.

3 Likes

This has cleared a lot up for me being new to the BBH. And I think it’s a great format for all the bears to help drive the project forward. I look forward to this rolling out asap

1 Like

really good! thank you for landing your mind to the project JJH

3 Likes

This proposal has been slightly updated. Naming conventions have reverted back to pods/committees. Suggestions for name changes can be made with further proposals. See updated Diagram below, again if somebody can make a cool artistic version of this for marketing it would be dope. Thanks!