Atmosfearful It seems for us dissenters it’s (B). We thought consensual/collective organization/management was at least half the values/priorities of KlimaDAO, inherent in the name, the other half of course being climate. Like I’ve said, I came for both. If half of that is being changed (or affirmed in the eyes of Core/Council and prelude was a major misalignment with myself/others), it’s not an “ultimatum” to no longer wish to work in the DAO and let you/contributors/community know that. No one wishes anything but the best success for KlimaDAO and all our Klimates. It’s not a negotiation tactic: it’s the truth.
For the last paragraph and related to @Dionysus’s post, severe disappointment in Core/Council’s approach to this does not equate to personal disrespect. None of us think you’re bad guys. If that has been inferred, I’m sorry. I really appreciate you, Dio, and all the Core/Council. Or I wouldn’t have worked the last 6 months with you.
But I prefer to trust the collective system, over individual people, with 360° tangible feedback/answerability mechanisms. The KIP as is only top-down in that respect. I imagine it would be telling to see how Core/Council would vote on this KIP if the Core/Council roles rotated, like in democratic office or the EU Council. Governance systems are typically designed more fairly and resilient in those cases.
As for feedback to the Core specifically, and particularly the founders, I’ve recommended you guys attend more of (and regularize) the contributors’ “all-hands” meetings. It doesn’t feel good when the Core is relatively consistent about attending community office hours, but are mostly usually absent from their contributor equivalent. I’ve also recommended that we do rotating weekly departmental presentations what each team is working on, and whatever is not sensitive in nature be presented to the community too. I do also recommend that Core’s compensation be made more transparent, since it implies some privilege when the other contributors’ compensation has been published internally (and I’d have been fine for it to be shared with the community, or at least an aggregation/anonymization of it).
We understand that perfect democracy/transparency/accountability isn’t possible. But we don’t think you have to throw the baby out with the bathwater in abandoning the current green shoots self-management and turning immediately to age-old total hierarchy, since it’s simply not true our present choice is that or anarchy/failure.
Anyway, I’m proud of the 20-25% Klimates who voted for a more open and consensual DAO against this KIP, despite the full unanimity of the Core/Council for it.
For me, this is a Faustian Bargain for contributors, but I really do hope it’s worth it and a more egalitarian yet efficient KlimaDAO will soon be with us again. In the meantime, I’ll be rooting for you all from the community. I’ve lived under authoritarianism and democracy, and the latter is much better quality of life and too often taken for granted. I believe DAOs can bring the latter to our workplace too and appreciate those that incorporate collectivism from their genesis. It was long said for 100+ years the USA couldn’t do it either, and its great democratic experiment doomed to anarchy/failure. It’s not perfect, but think we’re doing okay (same went for KlimaDAO).
Long live KlimaDAO