First Month Recap

It's definitely been an intense first month as the DAO Project Manager and there's been a lot of learning and evolving on the go. I'm going to recap the main highlights below, lessons learned and then I'll include invoicing and a daily worklog at the bottom.

Once it became clear the proposal was likely to pass I began working to build the first run at a soft consensus layer in Discord. This allowed for a lot of great community involvement and feedback and also led to some complications. It became clear that a stake-weighted solution on soft consensus was going to be needed and that too many proposals were being suggested.

Over the course of the month I tightened up the requirements for the Discord based soft consensus guidelines and began speaking to Jarvie and one of the Peaked Open Projects developers on potential solutions. There's still development needed there and I believe there's potential to build a solid soft consensus layer with them and possibly partner with them for a DAO focused page on their site.

I put in a good amount of time and effort into education on the current centralized exchange and market maker situation. Had meetings with Flowdesk and made a proposal to hire them with my own DEC that failed. It seems the majority of the community is fine with moving away from centralized exchanges so I have no plans to pursue market makers or centralized exchanges until there is some community consensus to do so. We are currently being delisted from Huobi/HTX.

While that was going on I was auditing our LPs. The findings were interesting and I think we can ultimately better manage our LP inflation. That said, this investigation and subsequent communication with large liquidity providers made it clear the information on the Splinterlands site was incorrect. I've already spoken to the team and am working to get that corrected. We'll reevaluate in a few weeks with accurate numbers.

There was a lot of time spent working on building soft consensus with the community and drafting or revising drafts for community proposals as well as associated conversations with team members to determine viability or research issues. I'll include a daily breakdown at the end so this isn't just a massive read.

We have had some challenges. The first attempt at developing a soft consensus layer left us with way too many suggestions for proposals without much in the way of actionable ideas. This took a lot of time to deal with and also gave me a lot of insight into what players are thinking and wanting. The process has been refined and should be a bit smoother while we develop the stake-weighted solution.

That said, we have now run six community proposals and as of the time of writing four of them are passing, one did not have enough votes to go to a full vote and another is pending. Myself and others also became aware of the wording in Matt's last update to how the preproposal process works and I've since asked PeakMonsters and Splex to update their preproposal pages to reflect the 5% of stake supporting the proposal requirement.

I think this is a strong indicator that when we work together to hear everyone's concerns and ideas on how to build better proposals, we get closer to consensus and can ensure that we're running quality proposals the community wants to see. Of course implementation hasn't been perfect and we're learning as we go. We'll keep getting better and so will the tools we're using.

One final note in relation to proposals: I'd like to apologize for any confusion related to the current proposal about Rebellion Packs in rewards chests. To be clear this was not a community proposal and Matt paid for it. That said the structure of the proposal was not ideal and I created it under the impression that packs in chests was a done deal. Matt later clarified that will require a proposal to put the packs in chests so the proposal I made was ultimately invalid but it's giving us a good idea of where the community stands.

To rectify the situation I plan to take the community feedback into consideration and open a Discord discussion on how to approach a proposal to put packs in chests. Apologies for the confusion and unnecessary drama related to this topic as that was never my intention. I've learned from it and will do my best to ensure we don't have any more "double negative" wording in proposals going forward.

Thanks for the opportunity to work for the DAO and all of you and I'll keep doing my best to create value for this ecosystem.

Work Log

Month 1 work log.
It should be noted that I didn't include a lot of the repetitive daily work like managing social media accounts or responding to questions/dms as that seems too noisy. It's more of a high level overview of what I'm working on during the day.

It's still too soon to gather useful metrics on socials. We've gained 150 followers on Twitter and 11 on YouTube for the first DAOn Hall. You can track them here:
Social Metrics Twitter
Social Metrics YouTube

Current Suggestions

At this time I think our best options are to look into branching out and creating new LPs, finding strategic partnerships that benefit SPS and Splinterlands, and hosting a gamejam. These options would allow us to branch out beyond our limited ecosystem and potentially attract players and developers from the wider Web3 Space. I've shared many thoughts and ideas on how to approach these topics in our Discord forums if you'd like to, please join into the conversations or feel free to share your thoughts below.

Invoicing

This month I ran 6 community proposals so the DAO needs to burn 600,000 DEC. The proposals are linked below:
Proposal 1
Proposal 2
Proposal 3
Proposal 4
Proposal 5
Proposal 6

Requesting the DAO to release first monthly pay of 5000 USDT to Ethereum wallet:
0x256Bcb7A2Eb8Ee48a1E9F4b157eAAc6E5C83532e