AdministratorSeptember 29, 2020 at 15:55
Some important questions were raised during our recent AMA (and elsewhere) about the role of the AmpleSense DAO in relationship to the Ampleforth team and protocol governance such as:
- Why is a separate DAO needed when the Ampleforth team has an Ecosystem Fund?
- Will the DAO split the Ampleforth community?
- Should the DAO be involved in protocol level discussions such as whether to censor specific wallets, such as what occurred in the recent Kucoin hack?
Let’s discuss these questions here.
MemberSeptember 30, 2020 at 02:24
1. A separate DAO is “needed” because the core team did not want to support a DAO directly and relinquish control of the protocol.
2. Yes, the DAO has split the community.
3. No, it should not. Ampleforth should create a proper DAO structure which can effectively decentralize protocol control.
Ampleforth has lost the community. The only thing left for them is to issue a public apology, completely re-work community interactions, and absorb the AmpleSense DAO effort with a proper DAO and a strong commitment to actually decentralizing the protocol.
- This reply was modified 1 year ago by AMPL_Warlord.
AdministratorSeptember 30, 2020 at 03:58
Thanks for your comment.
First, this is a good opportunity to take a step back from the current debate about decentralization and take a look at the problems we all know the Ampleforth and other elastic protocols face:
1. Uneven Demand: These are young protocols, prone to instability. The cure for this is simple: increase demand by aggressively developing unique and high-value use cases for these cryptos beyond speculation and liquidity mining.
2. Lack of knowledge and understanding: We saw during the first big burst of demand for Ample in July that people really had a hard time understanding how to use Ample, what is for it’s benefits, etc. — they still do.
There is a need for urgent action to address these issues.
The AmpleSense DAO was established to address these concerns. As we outline on our home page at amplesense.io, the DAO’s primary goals are to: “drive broad global adoption of products, services and applications utilizing Ample; forge alliances with others interested in growing the global elastic finance (#EeFi) economy.”
A secondary goal is to improve education and understanding about elastic finance assets so that users, investors and others make better decisions about them.
Now, nowhere in that mission statement is there any discussion about utilizing this ecosystem building and educational organization (the DAO) to make decisions about how Ampleforth is governed at the protocol level.
In fact it would be inappropriate for the DAO to seek to involve itself in these protocol governance efforts — except as a sounding board and advisor to the team, if they wish to involve the DAO as community representatives.
First, the core development team has mentioned several times that it will be taking a governance-lite approach to the Ampleforth protocol.
Second, while they may have some activity in the ecosystem development arena, their concerns and areas of focus may differ from what the community is interested in pursuing. The the pace of these development efforts may be slower than what the community may demand. This is especially because they have announced that the bulk of the Ecosystem Fund is meant to support liquidity mining over the next ten years.
The AmpleSense DAO is needed to step into this gap and provide an independent and community accountable source of investment into the Ampleforth and larger elastic finance ecosystem. And, we are needed to create a more robust and widespread communication and educational effort around elastic finance and the benefits of these assets in DeFi and beyond, in inventive and unique ways.
An organization that is transparent, accountable, visible, trackable and independent is of significant value in terms of developing these assets and aggressively growing the ecosystem.
In that context, there is every reason that the AmpleSense DAO should exist — independently from the core development team.
Let the core development team develop — what may be a very lightweight governance system to let the community help to manage issues related to the protocol’s governance. That’s in their power, and that’s their responsibility.
Let the community step in to aggressively develop products, services, communications, marketing, education and applications that serve our needs and are developed at the pace the community demands. That’s in our power, and that’s our responsibility.
The Ampleforth core development team will handle governance on its own terms and decentralize the protocol in the way they see fit.
The AmpleSense DAO will focus on aggressively building demand, utility and education for elastic finance assets, including Ample, in ways that meet the community’s wants and needs.
Doing this will require the AmpleSense DAO to be:
– A separate organization
– Have seperate goals
– Serve separate masters (the community)
– Have separate funding: so the DAO can act when and how it needs to.
I hope I’ve made this distinction clear. Thank you.
- This reply was modified 1 year ago by davoice321.
MemberSeptember 30, 2020 at 04:31
It doesn’t make sense to me that the DAO’s goal of to “drive broad global adoption of products, services and applications utilizing Ample; forge alliances with others interested in growing the global elastic finance (#EeFi) economy” should be different from the goals of Ampleforth itself. Is Ampleforth’s goal not to drive adoption of Ample?
The Ampleforth team should be committed to driving adoption, improving education, and building new use cases. In fact, they state these are their goals…
AmpleSense exists because Ampleforth did not want to support a DAO structure directly, and wanted to retain centralized control of the protocol and of the AMPL reserves.
But this fractured the community. Now Ampleforth, rogue supporters, and AmpleSense all exist. They should be aligned, instead they are separated.
AmpleSense is trying to justify this separation but the reality is it is just because Ampleforth did not want to support a DAO and wanted to retain centralized control.
I don’t agree with this direction and feel that Ampleforth has major shortcomings in terms of centralization, community, transparency, and governance. The recent incidents have highlighted this and resulted in major community fallout.
I really want to see Ampleforth succeed, I generally thought it was a better version of bitcoin for all of the fundamental economic reasons which led us all here.
But an ideal money in the final state would be owned and used by the community. It’s not the case with Ampleforth.
I’m not trying to be critical or negative, in fact I’m sad to say all of this, I really liked this project. But the reality is crypto lives or dies by the community and as a community member this is how I see it.
AdministratorSeptember 30, 2020 at 05:16
The AmpleSense Dao came about as an independent effort to address the concerns I outlined above, and because we felt and still feel an community-based effort to drive these goals is required.
In fact the ampleforth team discussed their efforts at governance and never conflated the two organizations (Amplesense and the foundation)
Our goal was never to decentralize the governance of the ampleforth protocol.
It has always been to drive the elastic finance and ampleforth ecosystem.
In fact that is what decentralization is all about, different voices and groups coming together to work toward similar goals but with independent centers of gravity and approaches.
Having the team be the center of gravity for all these activities goes against the decentralization ethos you assert is your focus.
We can all be on the same team, but we don’t, or we shouldn’t all have the same masters.
Any global community is going to have its different centers of gravity, it’s many voices. It doesn’t nor should it all be controlled by one entity.
In fact the amplesense and elastic finance community is still young. It’s just getting its sea legs. You see fractured, I see youth and growth and differences of opinion. All healthy.
AmpleSense was here before this decentralization issue became a topic of conversation.
And there’s no evidence to suggest that the team won’t create a governance structure on its own.
AmpleSense being independent and focusing on different objectives is what decentralization is all about.
MemberSeptember 30, 2020 at 08:02
I don’t have any issue with independent community organization, such as AmpleSense.
The issue I have is that AmpleSense’s stated objectives should overlap with the Ampleforth foundation’s own objectives. The fact that they have to be separate is just a testament to how the core team has left the community on its own.
“Having the team be the center of gravity for all these activities goes against the decentralization ethos you assert is your focus.” -> The team should not be the center of gravity. They should focus on decentralizing control and embracing the community. The community should become the center of gravity. If they did this, all the effort in AmpleSense would easily be consolidated and aligned with Ampleforth directly.
I agree elastic finance is still incredibly new, fragile, and growing. Much of this will be forgotten in the end, and if the team retains centralized control and continues building out new tech and integrations it may likely succeed.
But how the current situation has been handled is a huge red flag which I cannot support. My comments here are only an effort to express my view that a workable solution would involve a credible move toward decentralized governance and realignment with the community.
That’s all—good luck with AmpleSense and additional efforts to move AMPL forward.
AdministratorSeptember 30, 2020 at 16:27
I think your focus is currently on protocol governance, while ours is on ecosystem development and expansion.
And, as discussed previously, there’s nothing wrong with different agents and entities working on similar goals at the same time.
The key is being collaborative and seeking advice and input so that activities have the maximum impact.
As outlined in our recent post re: the DAO’s accomplishments to date, engaging with the core development team around the DAO and its activities has been a priority. So we’re focusing on collaborating with the community and the Ampleforth team to have the maximum positive impact.
I hope you’ll continue to engage as this process moves ahead.
Log in to reply.