Angela Kreitenweis - applying for the Head of Gov role

House of Stake Governance
1

:waving_hand: Hello NEAR community – I’m Angela, and I’d like to introduce myself as a candidate for the House of Stake Head of Governance.

I got into crypto back in 2016, while working at a VC scouting early-stage Web2 startups in the energy and decentralization space. That role put me face-to-face with some of the earliest crypto builders — including the Ethereum team, Gnosis, Ocean Protocol, and many others who were just beginning to sketch out what decentralized systems could become.
What really hooked me wasn’t the tech itself — it was the design space it opened for how we build and govern organizations:

  • How we define roles without formal titles
  • How we grant access permissionlessly
  • How we align incentives at scale
  • How we coordinate people globally, with code as our shared territory

I quickly fell down the rabbit hole of incentive design and left the Web2 world, started organizing meetups on token design in 2018, and contributed to early work in token launches and governance infrastructure at the Token Engineering Commons (TEC) from 2019. That led me to Gitcoin’s Fraud Detection & Defense workstream (2022), where we defended our mission and budget during a contentious governance cycle, a journey that gave me a healthy dose of realism about DAO politics and coordination.

From 2020–2024, I led TE Academy, the first dedicated educational program for token-based mechanism design and crypto governance. We developed a global peer-to-peer learning platform for emerging fields like token engineering, mechanism design, and token-based governance.

  • 5,000+ students enrolled
  • 1,700+ graduate NFTs minted
  • NFT-based meritocratic system to incentivize contributors and assign decision-making power
  • $1M+ raised for education as public goods through partnerships with protocols like Optimism, NEAR, ENS, Gnosis, and the Ethereum Foundation

In 2024, I co-founded GovXS, a research group focused on decision-making systems and voting design. We published a major evaluation for Optimism’s $850M Retro Funding program, using both computational social choice and governance fieldwork to inform tradeoffs in voting mechanisms. Our work is now part of ongoing discussions in both crypto and academic spaces — including talks at EthCC and a paper accepted at DAWO 2025.
Over the past few weeks, I’ve also started contributing to House of Stake documents and getting to know the team.

:compass: My motivation for NEAR and House of Stake
Now, I’m excited to contribute to the NEAR ecosystem as a Head of Governance at House of Stake.
I believe that decentralized governance isn’t just a philosophical ideal — it can be a practical competitive advantage when done right.
But we have to be honest: Many DAOs are quietly re-centralizing to overcome friction.

  • Arbitrum introduced Arbitrum Aligned Entities (AAEs) to address inefficiencies, unclear stakeholder roles, and accountability gaps.
  • Decentraland DAO established an executive arm and a DAO council, with token holders maintaining only indirect accountability via council elections.
  • Optimism launches Optimistic Approvals and Stakeholder Voting to better represent key stakeholder groups and solve voter fatigue.

We can learn from all of these. NEAR now has the opportunity to adopt what works — and avoid what doesn’t. With the right scope, structure, and accountability, the House of Stake can become a driving force behind NEAR’s long-term success.

:gear: Where I’d start (MVP mindset)
Governance should never be abstract. It should serve execution.
Here’s where I’d begin:

  1. Define the scope of decisions at HoS : What should be governed, and by whom?
  2. Structure the voting bodies: Community, experts, councils, and eventually: AI agents
  3. Align incentives: Voter skin in the game, accountability, and resilience to malicious actors
  4. Measure outcomes: run experiments and gain insights to evaluate governance effectiveness and iterate quickly

:light_bulb: Governance and AI? Yes.
I’m particularly excited about exploring how AI agents can help facilitate and even participate in governance — from surfacing key information to proposing decisions based on clearly defined mandates.
The combination of NEAR as the execution layer for AI-native apps and the opportunity to prototype AI-governed AI is truly groundbreaking.

:puzzle_piece: Let’s not just wish for a decentralized future. Let’s build it.
Thanks for reading. I’m excited about the direction NEAR is taking, and would love to hear your thoughts, ideas, and use cases.
Drop a comment below, or DM me on Telegram or on X (tag aktws).

I’d be thrilled to work toward this future alongside the House of Stake Core team, NEAR Foundation, and trusted service providers like Gauntlet, Agora, and Hack Humanity.

If we get governance right, NEAR won’t just be philosophically aligned with the idea of decentralization — it will be the ecosystem that proves DAOs work.

10 Likes
Hiring a Head of Governance
2

I like that Angela put Community on the first place and used the capital letter. This is something that is clearly missing from the current HoS core team.

3 Likes
3

So nice to meet you, @AK_HoG , I’m very impressed with your TE Academy project and your metrics-based governance presentation that you recently did in July. I do have a couple of questions, to help me to understand your thoughts regarding this role, as I’m looking forward to hearing more about you. Tk u!

My questions are:

  1. You mentioned a great “MVP mindset” for HoS, with four key areas to start: scope, structure, incentives, and measuring outcomes. Given the community’s current need to rebuild trust and the job’s focus on both strategy and day-to-day operations, what is your single highest priority for the first 30 days, and what are the tangible, measurable outcomes you would aim to deliver?

  2. You accurately pointed out that many DAOs, like Arbitrum and Optimism, are quietly re-centralizing to overcome friction (among many others currently). How would you apply the lessons learned from these examples to the NEAR ecosystem? Specifically, how would you design a system for HoS that avoids re-centralization while still being efficient enough to “serve execution,” as you put it?

  3. Your work with TE Academy and GovXS is fantastic, and demonstrates a strong background in research and mechanism design. The job requires translating “research output into shipped code” and maintaining a delivery pipeline. How would you bridge the gap between your research-focused background and the day-to-day operational demands of shipping products with vendors like Gauntlet and Agora?

2 Likes
4

These are great questions @coffee-crusher, really appreciate it! :folded_hands:

Before I dive in, a quick note: it’s clear NEAR is undergoing some strategic shifts. At this point, I don’t yet have a full picture, only community conversations, not first-hand information. So rather than speculate, I’ll answer based on governance principles I believe hold true regardless of strategic shifts.

Q1 – What’s the #1 priority in the first 30 days?
Clarity.

Do voters understand what success looks like for NEAR?
Illia said it well in this recent conversation (min. 42:08):
”One (thing) is there’s alignment on a mission, let’s call it North Star as a way to measure how much progress we made on our mission. (…) After that, effectively the only question is if some action gets you closer to that North Star or not, and out of all the possible actions you can take and the capacity you can take at any moment, is this the best action?”

So in the first 30 days, I’d aim to operationalize a shared North Star.
I’ll ask:

  • Do voters have the context, data, and information they need to act in NEAR’s best interest — today, in 3 months, 6 months, 12 months?
  • Are stakeholder voices represented in a way that’s clear, proportional, and trustworthy?
  • How can the DAO build and support a trusted community of capable decision-makers — and how can contributors trust the system in return?
  • And finally: How can we measure whether our decisions are working — and improve based on evidence?

Only after that a foundation is in place do things like committee design, process flow, or veNEAR economics become meaningful. Otherwise, we’re just throwing tools at a coordination failure.

Q2 – How to avoid quiet re-centralization?
First, we have to understand why DAOs are re-centralizing. A key insight comes directly from the Arbitrum forum: “Too many operational decisions are tasked to people and organizations that do not have Arbitrum winning as their number one priority. ”

Decentralization without aligned incentives is wishful thinking.
In most DAOs today, voters are:

  • Not held accountable for negative outcomes
  • Not rewarded for positive outcomes
  • Often incentivized to vote in their own short-term interest, even with good intentions, not necessarily in the best interest of the protocol

So if we know the incentives are broken, how can we expect DAOs to produce better outcomes?
If chosen for this role, I’d love to work with the whole NEAR community to address this:

  • How can we build positive-sum incentive systems into governance?
  • How do we make alignment observable and actionable?
  • And how do we protect against misaligned influence while keeping participation open?

Q3 – Can I deliver with vendors like Gauntlet and Agora? Yes.
I’ve led operational teams for over a decade. As Founder & CEO of TE Academy (2020–2024), I was responsible, and personally liable, for everything from product to payroll.
We built our Web2/Web3 infrastructure, delivered across time zones, launched live programs under pressure, and managed grants and sponsorships from some of the biggest names in the space: Optimism, ENS, Gnosis, 1kx, Consensys, and more. We shipped with small teams, aggressive deadlines, and no excuses.
So yes — I love the research side of governance. But I’ve also done the work of shipping real infrastructure in the messiness of real ecosystems.
There’s no substitute for real ownership. I’ve had it, and I’m ready to take it again.

Thanks again — I’m really glad to be part of this conversation and would love to go deeper on any of these points!

3 Likes
Questions for Head of Governance Candidates
5

Do you have some ideas around this?

More than that, happy to read about your profile willing to become part of NEAR Governance!

6

Thanks for the question @cloudmex-alan it’s a critical one. Let me share how I’m thinking about it.

General View

In principle, a DAO should govern all areas that are critical to the success of the protocol. That includes both strategic and operational decisions. But especially in the pre–product-market-fit phase (where we are at NEAR), it’s important to recognize that the DAO must remain agile, and voting should not micro-manage. Designing governance structures that allow for pivots is a major challenge (and a topic worth its own dedicated post).

Progressive Decentralization

I’m a strong advocate of progressive decentralization. In practice, this means starting with a limited scope, aligning incentives carefully, and expanding decision-making power as the system matures. (see my earlier post :backhand_index_pointing_up: )

What Decisions Should a DAO Govern?

In most ecosystems, the core governance areas fall into five categories:

  • Budget (grants, rewards, funding rounds)

  • Community & Ecosystem Development (partnerships, community roles, ambassadors, etc.)

  • Protocol Upgrades (technical changes)

  • Token Economics (supply, distribution, lockups, buybacks, etc.)

  • Governance Process, Structure & Committees (delegates, reviewers, councils, etc.)

Can a DAO still be considered legitimate if it doesn’t govern one or more of these areas? For example, what if HoS governance didn’t have direct authority over budget and grants?

Let’s be honest: grants are the main engine of engagement in most DAOs. When there’s money on the table, people show up, even if only to pitch proposals. That’s the current reality in crypto-native governance.

Now imagine building up governance without that tool.

For a Head of Governance, this creates a real constraint: the simplest path to rapid community engagement would be to spin up a $10M grant round, a guaranteed flood of activity! But how do you bootstrap active participation without controlling the levers that typically spark it? That’s a tough nut to crack.

What This Means for HoS

Here’s a thought experiment: I asked myself, if this role didn’t come with authority over budget and grants, would I still engage?
And I’d like to ask the community: if HoS DAO didn’t come with authority over budget and grants, would YOU still engage?

My answer is yes.

And yours? I’d love to hear your thoughts. Your feedback will also help shape my decision around this role.

Thanks again :folded_hands:

2 Likes
7

Agree and I like this perspective

However, I don’t think this is the best approach. Grants have a long history of evaporation without creating long term commitment.

So we need to figure out ways where the community makers can work but not by having the traditional grants. I think we should re shape this in order to make it more prosperous for everybody.

2 Likes
8

:waving_hand: Thank you for your application and for being open to dialogue with the community.

Recent conversations have shown that updating NEAR’s economy is now one of the most pressing topics — essential both for long-term sustainability and for strengthening participants’ trust in the network.

In this context, I’ve put forward a proposal for an updated economic model, focusing on: limited emission, reduced inflation, long-term staking rewards, and liquidity mining. The idea is to make NEAR’s monetary policy more predictable, balanced, and fair for everyone in the ecosystem.

:red_question_mark:
Do you see yourself initiating an update of NEAR’s monetary policy, or supporting the existing proposal by sharing your own vision and possible steps for introducing new parameters into the network?

If you had to choose three top priorities for improving NEAR’s economy, which areas would you focus on first — and why?

And finally, in your view, what measures could best protect validators and stakers during potential tokenomics changes, ensuring both profitability and long-term stability?

Thanks for your willingness to engage on such critical issues for the ecosystem

X: https://x.com/kysb_b/status/1975237738136826273?s=46 :collision:

9

akrtws_TE-Academy

Let’s make it a rule to publish weekly reports about HoG work and also hold weekly syncs with the community.

What do you think about this?

2 Likes
10

You are all warmly invited to join the

:spiral_calendar: GM House of Stake — Governance Calls

Wednesdays, 7pm UTC
https://meet.google.com/pzx-jxqp-kkm

More here:

See you there!

4 Likes