[Report] : Transparency Commission Investigation on Creatives DAO

Presenting the final approved report by TC for Investigation against Creatives DAO,

Submission ID : 6a0bda3f-d866-4bc2-9a79-9bfa4033d568

Subject of Investigation: Creatives DAO

Nature of Investigation: Financial Irregularities

Date of complaint: 16/01/2024

Summary of Complaint:

  • Questions raised about Creatives DAO Council Members remuneration:
    Council members paid themselves $4,000 per month in November & December, when the House of Merit budget only approved $2,500 per Council member for December and $3k for November. CDAO Councils approved payment for January without approval from HOM & COA.

  • Broad questions around the appropriate use of funds: How should a Grassroots DAO treat ‘leftover’ funds in Treasury?

  • Broad questions around the checks and balances between GDAOs and House of Merit.

Detailed Report with Findings and Recommendations : Copy of TC CDAO Investigation Report - Private - Google Docs


Please confirm the month and wallets associated for clarity as I was a part of the DAO till October end and received my last payout as a council and trustee for the month of October.

Post that, I haven’t received any payment from CDAO.

1 Like

Thanks for the clarity. The months are mentioned now from the original report that we’d received.


Thanks for bringing this up.

I can confirm that the current investigation only involves current sitting Councils of Creatives DAO and does not include you.

For transparency and accountability, everyone can check the Creatives DAO on-chain activity:

Astra++: https://near.org/astraplusplus.ndctools.near/widget/home?page=dao&daoId=creativesdao.sputnik-dao.near

Alternatively, the DAO activity can also be seen through the Pikespeak widget on BOS:


Thanks for clarifying. Let me know if I can help in any way.

1 Like

In my opinion left over funds should be used to grow the community cause if it was the reversal GDAO would request extra to balance up the fund lost due to price impact……
So if there’s an increase in funds or left overs they should be used for the interest of growing the community


I like CreativesDAO, and am grateful to them for giving our DAO such a vibrant start with NEAR.

However, these reports, and corresponding blockchain data, are concerning to me.

One observation, is that only 2 votes are presently required to pass resolutions, noting it’s a smaller council. Would grassroots DAOs - and those with access to considerable power / funds - be better served by even slightly bigger councils? As it’s easy to find a second vote to pass resolutions - particularly people over-paying themselves - that might not have the full oversight as required.

There’s a few bigger amounts transferred that don’t make much sense to me - like transferring $15K to a project that only requested $10K, with the 5K balance stated to be “held in trust until January”.

I see that many of the old council have since departed CDAO, and the new leadership is working towards correcting various issues.

More starkly, what are the actual legal ramifications of actions like this that violating (smart contract) agreements, and are on a blockchain? Or there isn’t really any official recourse possible?


You nailed it there is more to all of this alot of questions to be asked

Thanks for dropping your concern. I think you confused between 2 different proposals. Answered it here: [APPROVED] CreativesDAO Nov Request - Pilot Quadratic Funding Round for Creative Public Goods via PotLock - #5 by williamx