I might suggest a staff engineer role that works to establish and maintain standards & code quality and coordinate efforts across the projects, depending on the workload and involvement of the head of engineering.
A good article on this by rekt - Rekt - Sushiswap Scandal
I agree, especially in a fully remote workplace like Sushi.
Thanks for the writeup Dean & Alex!
I wanted to pick up on @hhk , @Tangle 's comments. A code of conduct is a great idea and it helps with accountability! And we could go beyond standard statements that everyone agrees on. We could do it per person - Similar to an employment contract, a contributor/council/team/multisig member could commit to, not just working on certain tasks, but also advocating for certain principles and certain Sushi stakeholders.
We could ask them eg. how they’d handle
- Team/contributor/council compensation
- Recruiting / hiring / offboarding
- Decision transparency for different decisions (new product, offboarding team member, etc)
- Decision involvement (Who needs to be part of which decision)
- any of the recently surfaced controversial decisions
From the answers we could derive common guidelines as well as personal commitments from everyone applying for a paid task/position in the Sushi ecosystem.
So i have noodled on this a bit and Im not sure i am convinced yet on the community elected do’ers being the ones to strategically run the co. I feel like the community may not, on aggregate, be in a position to search for the most qualified candidate(s) to run the co.
I feel like we should have a community elected Board of Directors whos job it is to search for C-Suite level talent and enforce the Bylaws (yet to be written). They can review strategic proposals by the CEO/CFO/COO/CTO and put them to the community to vote if necessary.
The enforcement mechanism here is that if the BoD is allowing things to get pushed through without community vote, then the community will vote out the BoD and replace them. They are the community’s eyes and ears and would be able to go more in depth to search for management talent than “the community”.
The BoD would need to be a majority community elected group, and perhaps receive a stipend for their work, but its not a full time job. Perhaps regular votes, staggered, with 1-3 year renewals, to remain on the BoD. (Just spitballing)
Thoughts @Alex17 ?
Thanks for making this Arca,
I agree with pretty much everything stated, however I do believe we do need to address some more specific questions raised by others here in the comments.
I think Sushi is on the cusp of some truly significant moves. Not in a price action way (though I think we’d all like to see that), but as a potential template for other DAOs to follow as they grow.
Sushi, being so community focused for so long has been great, but I think it’s time to step it up and really show what a DAO can be, and you proposal seems like a great step towards that end.
agreed, terms of reference for the different positions, council formation and decision types and procedure would make this proposal even more complete. But it is a very good start already and sets good foundations.
organizing teams around the current products freezes sushi in place, leads to resource fights between teams/products and incentivizes lack of coordination or worse infighting. I agree with the commenter that discipline is the way to go.
I agree with this sentiment that we have an opportunity here to chart a path for the DAO model of the future. Something that others will emulate.
Autonomously running smart contracts, decentralized front end (someday), users, community and stakeholders around the world, global devs contributing based on DAO governance. An uncensorable and unstoppable financial app running on decentralized networks and governance rails. I believe this should be our ultimate goal.
Acknowledging all that will take a lot of time and work, let’s at least set the table now. And make sure our leadership and any structure we put in place now pushes us further in that direction. Let’s not fall into comfy traps of operating like tradfi/web2 companies. We have to do the hard work to become something greater. A model DAO.
This proposal is a constructive way to get out of the current paralysis and set a clear organizational example for DAOs. You have my vote.
I fail to see how this addresses the issues raised by the community in the past few days.
I’ve seen a lot of proposals being submitted on management, hiring, firing, compensation, etc. I voted yes on this particular proposal as I believe it is the most thoughtful although I think other decisions also need to made and other issues need to be addressed. For now, I’d like to see us proceed and further discuss this proposal.
Hey Naim, thank you for your kind words. I will do my best to answer your questions here and differ to those who would be best suited to answer the questions. Our goal with this proposal was to outline an overall framework that we think could allow Sushi to scale, and provide significantly more transparency back to the Sushi community. If this passes, we would like to help dive deeper into these important details on the transition.
In terms of your question on the entity, I will defer to Sushi legal council on this in terms of type and where it is located. However, I would like to see this owned by the Sushi treasury along with the Sushi.com domain. In terms of ownership/equity of the Core entity, I would like to see that all owned by the Sushi Treasury as well.
In terms of product teams and sushiPro, 100% I think this framework outlines how a product team should be structured combined with the grants proposal/oversight from governance to adequately resource each product line in terms of resources and capital. As Sushi continues to expand as a defi suite of products, I expect numerous more product lines will fall into this structure!
In terms of professional transparency reporting being needed, 100%. We see these reports coming from Messari on Compound, MKR’s monthly reporting, and Aave’s weekly reporting. I think all defi needs to be doing this, especially Sushi with how much more community-owned and operated it is. It is one of the responsibilities that we outline that will be required under this new structure.
In terms of onboarding and offboarding yes I would want to see this done via the core team. I think our proposal on product teams will lead to significant expansion of the core team to fill out the product teams, something I think is needed. these are expected growing pains we have seen, but like everything, this needs transparency and a framework that I hope our proposal addresses! Additionally, I would like to point to the upcoming Sushi Gigs release that I hope will significantly help onboard new talent and contributors.
Thank you for your comments and kind words Naim, I hope this answer helps address your comments and gives insights into how we are thinking about the re-org!
Thank you for your comments Fig. The way I see it in the future is that Sushi Core will just be one entity operating and building under the Sushi Treasury DAO. I hope this product teams structure can be used for future DAOs as well as Core, and the transparency reports that this proposal will require can better include the community in key decisions, that all leads to future growth of Sushi.
Hey HHK! Thank you for your feedback and questions. I would love to see a code of conduct and a core team mission statement also created and something we plan to push for from the core team if the re-org goes through. Having clear rules, values, and goals that everyone is striving for I think will go a long way in addressing some of the issues that have taken place. I will spend some time reading through Nori’s and add some feedback.
In terms of entity, I agree, the goal here is to provide regulatory protection, allow for healthcare stuff like that for core contributors that dedicate their time building out Sushi. I will defer to Sushi legal, on type and location, but I would like to see.
In terms of C-suite, I see this as community general counsel roles. I think others like head of marketing, etc. should be voted on by core. If you disagree, happy to hear it and adjust!
In terms of power structure, I 100% agree that would explain it a lot better as well. Will make the changes to the diagram there! Replacing Core with trusted contributor, I don’t think it changes that much, I think this and Sushi gigs will actually help onboard a lot of new talent and contributors into the DAO.
In terms of quarterly grant, yes it would be for all product lines but with a detailed plan that would have to approved for where the funds flow and how they are divided between product teams! The budget I would expect to have some additional funds allocated for unexpected expenses (that is how most budgets I have worked on are usually planned) and all additional funds if not used would flow back to the treasury at the end of the quarter. If Sushi core has massive growth and needs additional funds, I see no reason why they shouldn’t be able to bring that up in an additional proposal in the middle of the quarter. Community will ultimately have a say in what is an important expense and what isn’t.
Hey Tangle, thank you for the feedback. Definitely agree on your thoughts on accountability for both Sushi and the rest of the world. I think one of the issues is the flat org structure both hurt product ownership, and left both core team members and the community able to hold core members accountable. I hope our proposal begins to address that with the increased transparency, and the role the community would play in voting through leadership. In addition to more equitable comp structure, that does have attachments to KPIs (think the UMA team has a very cool product that would work for this), I think it would be valuable for the core team to create both a code of conduct, and a mission statement. I have seen those being discussed in smaller DAOs and think that could be effective way to get the core team all agreeing to move forward together towards the goal of growing Sushi and shipping community owned defi products.
In terms of the diagram, I have heard multiple people say something similar to having a PM for each individual product teams. I agree with this, as Sushi continues to scale for the years to come we could see multiple PM’s for a single product line. This is only meant to be a framework to describe the overall structure. To scale I fully agree with you there and will make the changes before I release an updated version at the bottom of this forum on Friday!
100% agree on the community being involved and having open lines of communication with each member of the core team. We could do something like every week a product team joins the AMA and gives a 10min update on their specific product line. Again this is only supposed to be a general framework and the creation of product teams, there are numerous ways to use this structure as a starting point and continuing to improve it both during the re-org process and far into the future. I hope this helps address some of your questions and concerns! Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback!
Hey Jeff, thank you for your feedback! All of these additional details need drilling down, I agree with you wholeheartedly there. This proposal is meant to be an overview of the type of structure that we at Arca think can be scalable, increase product ownership for the core team, and increase transparency to the community. If this proposal passes, I think it will be very important to answer all of these questions and receive numerous rounds of community feedback.
I do understand your pushback on adding more to governance. I agree if a proposal like a roadmap or budget does not reach quorum, that would be an issue. But I also believe that the community will understand the importance of these votes and show up for them. I really appreciate your feedback and will do my best to address a lot of these details in a revised proposal after receiving the feedback on Friday.
Fully agree with this. The core team definitely needs to be aligned with the vision of Sushi via improved compensation. I think after we have the right structure in place, either this one or some of the others that have been proposed Comp should be at the top of the list of priorities from the community. We would like to work with the community on that as well!
Fully agree that improving governance processes is an under-explored item that I would love to see Sushi further explore, especially on-chain.
Additionally, in terms of the core team being aligned through an updated comp proposal, I fully agree. That is something we plan to work on once a restructure proposal passes!
With the details you gave, I think this new structure makes sense!