The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of kaereste, @Sinkas, and @Manugotsuka, and it’s based on their combined research, fact-checking, and ideation.
We are voting FOR the proposal.
First of all, we would like to thank the Scroll Foundation for bringing this proposal forward. We believe that a dedicated group can ignite initiatives more effectively, especially when supported by the Foundation, and move growth ideas to execution in a more streamlined way.
That said, we do not see a reason why this council needs to be as big, and launching with a reduced size makes more sense for this initial phase. A smaller group can and should still achieve the right mix of Foundation, delegates, and professionals that this initiative is aiming for, while simplifying coordination and allowing the DAO to judge performance more easily.
Most importantly, it would be beneficial to clarify who is the responsible party for the success of the EGC. We’ve often seen councils face a diffusion of responsibility, and therefore, no one feels absolute ownership for the results they deliver. We want to avoid that by knowing ahead of time who the accountable person is going to be. In that way, delegates can know who to turn to in the event they have questions or concerns, or who to rely on to tell them if something is wrong.
When it comes to finances, we don’t have a strong opinion on how much the council members should be paid, or how much the council should have at its disposal for operational expenses. What we do, however, feel strongly about is the need for proper documentation of expenses and transparency around them, either as they happen or with a regular reporting cadence.