The Treasury Guild proposes that the number of Treasury Guild committee seats be changed from 9 to 7.
The Treasury Guild was initially formed by the DAO with nine committee members. During the recent election, there were seven qualified nominees elected. The Treasury Guild feels that seven members is both a sufficient and more optimal number for operations. Rather than create a runoff election to fill the remaining two seats, the Treasury Guild proposes to modify the number of Treasury Guild committee seats from nine to seven.
This proposal would reduce the number of signatories on the Threshold multisig from 9 to 7 and reduce the threshold required to sign as well from 5 to 4.
Aug. 24 to Aug. 30 - Discussion Period
Aug. 31 to Sep. 4 - Snapshot Voting Period (contingent on above)
Sep. 5 - Implement Changes (contingent on above)
I support this proposal. I think the number of seats across the 1st Guilds generation was arbitrary based on who was around and volunteered back at the day, but not for any objective reason. I think the runoff election is fine as long as a Guild Committee thinks that they need more members and they didn’t fill all the seats.
In the current process of evaluating a list of roles for each of the Treasury Guild Committee members, it doesn’t seem that there are 9 roles to fill, so reducing the committee size makes sense. If, while evaluating possible roles, it came to light that there were more roles to fill, then a run-off election would make sense.
As it stands now, reducing the number of Treasury Guild Committee members to 7 makes sense to me.
I am in support of this proposal.
Is there a problem with keeping 5 as the threshold?
with 7 members, who should all be engaged, 5 controlling the purse doesn’t seem onerous.
I am in agreement with blitmore, and would also like to better understand the reasoning behind reducing this threshold.
That aside, It makes sense to me to reduce the number of seats - as Threshold continues to grow and learn, we adapt to the current needs of the DAO - Now that we are more organized and structured, I see no need for 9 members of the committee.
Should the Treasury Guild Committee determine that they need additional labor, I would propose that they work to locate existing talent within the DAO that can offer assistance and be compensated for that work without necessitating a committee seat.
I high threshold relative to the number of signers can become problematic if several people are travelling / on holiday / at a conference / sick.
Treasury activities involve a lot of time-sensitive operations, like swaps or incentives, that have to be executed within often reduced windows. Reaching the threshold number can be slow sometimes, particularly when you take into consideration different timezones (current committee has members in 3 different continents). We believe 4 is a sensible choice from an operational point of view, while still being secure.
Having said that, although the proposal asks for a threshold of 4, the current committee has agreed to set a threshold of 5 for the time being, and only reduce it to 4 in case we need it, but we wanted to be sure the DAO agrees to this as well.
Thanks Ben, David for your responses. I am aware of the problems around assembling a quorum to get work done in time. I have no problem voting to reduce seats on this committee. I would prefer the multisig to threshold remain at 5.