The Moderators DAO is meant to be the place where former moderators and on-duty moderators can make on-chain voting participation and where the funding can be used to kick-start initiatives where the whole creatives community participates in.
Some of the possible uses for the funding
Legal solutions: Creating a legal entity, paying lawyer fees, and similar.
Internet Domain: Owning and maintaining an internet domain for the Creatives DAO. Giving the possibility to host a website and to own an email where to centralize the ownership of the social networks
Kick-start initiatives for the whole community
Projects in front
Upgrade our Legal Status - Estimate USD 1000
We need a lawyer to help us now to create a document to be signed by the DAOs and to be uploaded into our Otoco.io platform with our newly created Delaware series LLC.
Create a Domain - Estimate USD 200
We will get a SSL, 1 year domain, 1 year hosting, email, and Creatives DAO website.
Near Certified Creative course - Estimate USD 800
Open call for the community to join the telegram https://t.me/NearCertifiedCreative and create a playbook and content for the course, we will look to use already made content from the DAOs related to teaching/learning.
In order to kick start the NFT Marketplace, we will make an open call for developers.
We will build a project presentation and roadmap
UX/UI for NFT Marketplace design can cost $5000 USD. We are certain we can make it happen for around $1000-$3000 USD. We will make an open call and then choose the best proposal from different designers once there is a budget.
Thank you @FritzWorm for posting this. I’d be glad to be part of it according to my possibilities
Let us know more about the specific projects. What kind of Marketplace are you envisioning and why creating another one? The certified course will integrate Near University?
Yes! We want that from the beginning, just need to finish the proposal.
Creatives basically Create, and the creations can be sold using a marketplace. If we want still be able to support Creatives in the future and to be a self-sustainable community we need to create a source of income closely related to what we do.
Giving life to an NFT Marketplace shaped by the community will help us to automatize income from the NFT sales and will help us to reach and onboard other creators and communities.
Very exited with this idea. I think we are going in a good path <3
I love to give feedback in projects <3 so, here is my 2 cents
There is a virtual legislation or we will set our legal stuff base in one country legislation?
This will include the creation of the entire site? There is any place with the list of the content of the site?
There is a link, here in the forum, to know more about this 2 projects?
I want to put a light in a method we use (here in Brazil, but i think its a world method).
When we have a large group of people or a complex project to do we divide people in groups and set power of decision to this group to handle thing about a topic like: content; design; distribution and other stuff that can be separate in group. Maybe that can help in Near Certified Creative Course initiative <3
We have some sort of a mix, hahaha. We ran an AMA in our telegram group with Otoco.io product manager. We need the whole DAOs to have a legal wrapper. The best option for members from several different countries to be able to sign and use a legal entity to protect themselves from legal liabilities is Otoco.
Already created the following:
It is a series LLC in the United States, but we can interact with it on-chain (virtual). Also, it is about $200, mostly from ETH fees (It is on the Ethereum network, waiting for them to add it to Aurora) Creatives DAO.pdf (356.7 KB)
Yes, this is part of what could be the Moderators duties. I can take that activity into my important ones.
Yes! Please you are welcome to the educational project, give us feedback with your method, it is for all the community to cross-collaborate and coordinate efforts for better onboarding.
Near Certified Creatives:
NFT Marketplace is related to the next steps into self-sustainability. Also keep in mind that this might be a partnership with an already on mainnet marketplace, like The Auction ;), this is still on discussion.
First of all, I want to say that I am glad to see all the discussion the moderators are bringing. I would also like to say that my opinions are not to be meant as attacks or nothing like this, but some legitim concerns about all this process.
One main problem is that the amount of moderators does not seem enough to evaluate all the proposals and reports in the proper time, in a way that making a moderators dao with more activities than technical evaluation of proposals and reports can be overwhelming, as it seems to me.
Another problem I see is that this DAO is requesting funds in a moment that there is a rule in place, in which new DAOs should not ask for funds. As Moderators DAO would be a new DAO, it should not ask for funds now. Because if it does, it starts its activities by being unfair to new DAOs, like the ones with respected members of the community, like LP DAO.
Another problem I could see is that this DAO is a new DAO and it is requesting 5,000 usd instead of the initial 2,000 usd for new DAOs. I can understand that many projects need more resources, but it is not ok to violate a rule create by itself. Moderators should be the example for the community. They should not request for funds, neither request for a larger amount, in this period. And they should not request 5,000 without showing results through previews reports.
A technical issue that should not be approved by you is the fact that your Introduction and your Proposal are all in the same document, what goes against the normal process and against the rules that all of our DAOs follow.
So it seems some adequacy of the proposal, the amount requested, and the timing of the submissions should be taken in consideration before you, as moderators, approve your own proposal, technically speaking.
I also think that links are missing for the projects that you are requesting funding. I saw you answered some of these links in a comment, but it would be nice if you can edit to put that information (the links for the projects) in the main text for those who are reading the proposal.
Concerning your Introduction, I did not see a good explanation of the objective, the justification about why it is important to near and to the community, why it is important to creatives, and how it will not interfere with all of your work on technical approvals. I also did not see any metrics.
I really think that we ask for introduction and proposals to be different documents, because there is more possibility of explanation in each one. So my suggestion would be for you to split these documents, if you may.
And another problem: you are approving yourselves. I think there is a problem in deciding that you will approve yourselves in 7 days, while other DAOs are taking more than 10 days to be approved. If you need many days to approve a proposal, the Creatives Council also needs many days to approve a proposal. I think the main problem of this proposal, as a general way, is that is taken as special in some way, because disrespect many rules. Because there are many technical difficulties here in your proposal, I think we should have a deeper discussion about it. Maybe I am wrong in all my critics, but I think we should at least discuss them.
Please, give me your feedback about what I just said. As I am a philosopher, I always know that I can be wrong, and I always try to really think about what people say.
[I would like to let it clear that concerning the projects themselves inside the proposal and their value to the ecosystem, I did not express any evaluation, because I need to read them carefully yet, but as far as it seems prima facie, they are bringing value to the community.]
The Moderators team had always tried to not be too rigid. Because guidelines are not rules.
So, even when the guidelines said that we receive proposals until the 7th of the month, several times we have accepted proposals that didn’t make it to the deadline nor deliver a complete report, and the community had not given any negative feedback regarding it but approved without much consideration.
In addition, this proposal is not the norm, this is not a DAO (community) but a DAO (tooling), so the DAO proposal is from the same Creatives DAO that already exist for all of us. The management of the funds is proposed to be the responsibility of the former councils and moderators and the funding is not going to be distributed into council rewards but directly spend on Creatives DAO needs.
Written I said 7 days is enough time for feedback from the community.
As no negative feedback was received we decided to wait a little longer.
Instead of 7, we wait 14 days.
And as any proposal, it needs to be approved by the DAO.
Kindly remind: one of our community values is pragmatism over perfection
U have been focused on the technical issues where there is no point to consider, I will like to ask you to focus your critical thinking on how to keep evolving without funds because the way we are being managed is not self-sustainable and the future is not clear. This proposal shared here is far from being perfect but it is trying to add some light to the next steps we need to take as a community.
Pragmatism over perfection is cool. I like it too, but I saw many proposals that had to be edited to satisfy our guidelines. And we can approve things beyond guidelines, but dont you agree that it is cool to follow the guidelines that were produced? Afterall guidelines will be used as criteria by the DAOs to make evaluations (i think).
Yes, I will talk about content too. I am just taking the necessary time to read it all. <3 It is too much material to digest in the time I am here again. I hope we can use the comments to improvement. I can make many critiques, but it is because I am deeply used to do that because of my profession of philosopher. So I hope you dont take it badly.
Hey Philosopher thanks for contributing to the conversation! I agree there is a ton of information to digest for all of us as a community right now so I appreciate that you have taken time to give your input. A few thoughts here on my end…
I know that June proposals were very delayed but I will note that mostly the old moderators (5 of us) were the ones moving through proposals while the new 5 were getting used to their role and spending time digesting all these changes. On top of this we made it a point to become much more analytical with each proposal so it took some time to really decide what “value” means. July will officially be the first time all 10 of us are tackling the proposals together - let’s see if 10 of us will be sufficient for the task!
(2 & 3) Technical Issues: I hear you and agree that with the power we hold we shouldn’t normalize bending the rules in our favor or making exceptions. I guess I don’t see this as bending the rules in our favor rather, creating a space for the community to build up the Creatives DAO as a whole into a self sustainable entity. I don’t see this DAO as a personal or group project - especially since none of the moderators will receive payment from this DAO - this is more a community system creation that can be used continuously for new moderators that rotate in to organize the sustainability functions/operations of the DAO. I can envision the DAO expanding to include more participants outside of just the moderators team and I would hope to see it prioritizing the funding of members within Creatives DAO who have the skills to accomplish whatever goals we are all looking to meet. The community as a whole could decide if the work submitted is sufficient enough or not as it would be representing us all. We could even evolve the moderators position to more people or add new/different types of positions for folks who want to dedicate themselves to operating the DAO etc. If the majority of the community feels this proposal to create a Moderators DAO is unfair I will completely respect that.
The objective of Moderators DAO is to create some type of efficient organized place for Creatives DAO growth, operations and self sustainability development to happen. These objectives are important in stabilizing ourselves as a serious entity inside and outside the NEAR ecosystem. If we desire to really level up we will need more organization and more channels to do so. Developing ourselves in this way gives us potential for many things and helps us continue this experiment of decentralized functioning.
Overall I am not married to the idea of a Moderators DAO but I am convinced that we need some sort of system to begin the work of operating Creatives DAO on a larger scale outside of just reviewing proposals. There needs to be some organized way for the DAO to create things like legal status, website, onboarding system, marketplaces, etc. It will definitely take more than just the moderators but right now the only folks seriously dedicating many hours to accomplishing these goals are the moderators.
The biggest concern I read (and feel) in this is the fear of the moderators gaining too much power and eliminating the voices of the community. That is really fair and something we should always consider when we have a goal of decentralization. Maybe some things we can consider are:
What are ways that we can efficiently build while maintaining active community conversations?
In what ways can we efficiently gain approval/rejection on certain initiatives delivered within these proposals?
How can we have the community approve the Moderators DAO proposal/give input on what should be the initiatives on the proposal?
Lastly, my question to you would be: What is a better solution to efficiently get moving on these initiatives of self sustainability for Creatives DAO?
Building on an already existing platform doesn’t sound like a bad idea to me either as I feel like we could figure out the royalties part if we opened our own store? But I am not set on either solution!
What seems most important to me is, whether it be on our own marketplace or built on another, we begin to show our services/products/art to the world collectively
Thank you so much, @adrianseneca, for your answer. You understood my point of view pretty well. And I think you brought wonderful questions, although very difficult ones. I will try to bring some answers to your questions tomorrow (because I have 3 events today and I have to think more about the questions before answering them).