Placeholder Considerations: Resources, Governance, and Legitimacy in NU4

[boxalex]

I made some minutes ago a proposal which adresses most if not all of our current foundation dicussion here, mostly even more.
After our conversation/discussion regarding the foundation “independence” i thought it’s worth making a formal discussion out of it in the form of a proposal which is open for further and other thoughts, input, suggestions … Maybe this would be a better place to discuss the issue further.

Proposal & Possible Changes in the Foundation Governance

Proposal & Possible Changes in the Foundation Governance This proposal is made to review, discuss and if needed change and enhance the Foundations Governance Background: In the current funding discussion and the expiring founders reward many proposals are made, some in favour of a new fund, some favouring the foundation or partially alligning funds to the foundation and some of course for no or no mandatory funding. In some funding proposals we read that the Zcash Foundation is fully indepen…

Reading now your above post again i think it’s ok to highlight some valid points you made:

@mlphresearch

Do you think the ZF board should not include individuals who are or have been affiliated with the ECC? It appears to me that, were such a rule introduced, it should apply equally to all development teams working on Zcash, because otherwise it would amount to special treatment. In other words, do you think all developers (except for those employed by the ZF) should be excluded from access to the ZF board?

Actually after a longer thought i came to the conclusion that the most fair approach would be to have people in the Foundations Community Governance Panel that have NO voice & vote allready elsewhere. In the concrete example this would mean Foundation board members should not be in the govarance panel as they have a final voice & vote in the board decisions they make. Same goes for ECC employees & founders. I think someone can safely come to the conclusion that their voice & vote & contribution is allready included in the ECC formal stance regarding a protocol change, idea, suggestion, decision, whatever.

In contrast your and my voice & vote & contribution doesn’t have this option to influence whatever.

@mlphresearch

If not, how would you distinguish between those who should have that right and those who should not?

No, i can only make suggestions that might be good, might be reasoned, might have some sense or in this case especially raises concerns. It’s not to me to decide whatever. I’am a huge fan of the german doctrine that only “positive” critice can lead to improvements. Who & how improves things later is not up to me alone, neither should it as i’am a human with flaws and mistakes by nature as well

@mlphresearch

Given it’s stated role, perhaps the ZF should instead be open to the community as a whole, including developers? I’m not saying the concerns you raise are irrelevant or unfounded as I’m sure we can all agree that the ZF should not be “captured” by any single interest. But maybe, instead of singling out concrete organizations or groups of people and denying them a voice in a structure that is arguably central to the strategic governance of Zcash, perhaps we should instead aim for a good balance of power?

This is a very valid point i try to adress in my Foundation Governance Proposal. In the case of the ECC i think they allready have a more than powerfull structure. They are the main developers, have main influence, main activity, the main voice, the main vote, the main funding, actually the main everything.
Having this in mind i think it’s missleading IF we talk about the ECC as it has no voice IF it’s not represented in the foundation’s board and/or the foundations governance panel. That’s simply not the case. As you call it “denying them a voice” is simply wrong in my opinion as we talk about here about a structure that should balance and maybe even oppose exactly THEIR voice.
My suggestions exactly aim for a good balance of power which in my opinion right now is currently everything else but not a good balance of power.

Let’s make an abstract but simple example:

In the US you have the Republicans and Democrates, right? One of these has the majority of power after elections, currently the Republicans while the Democrates should at least try to balance, overview, control here and there.
Now my how much independent would you see the Democrates IF:

• they are funded by the Republicans
• 2 of the 5 democrates party board members are as well representatives of the Republicans
• the democrates party governance panel includes let’s say 15% Republican representives

While this might be a more than abstract example i think it illustrates the conflict of interest very good.

@mlphresearch

Put differently, isn’t the ZF exactly the kind of meta-structure that should bring together all viewpoints and serve as a platform in which different interests can agree on what’s good for the ecosystem as whole, all things considered? I’m just throwing it out as an idea.

I absolutly agree to this and that fits exactly my point and personal vision how it should be. Actually it should include even a much wider implentation of different interests as it currently has, especially as said allready voices & votes & contributions from groups that have no platform. Hence a possibility of limitation for the ECC has these allready have the strongest platforum for their voice & vote & contribution, the Zcash blockchain, the protocol, the funding, the everything.

@mlphresearch

But at the same time, the ECC and the ZF are already separate legal entities, each with its own raison d’être, staffed with different individuals, and do not seem to have identical positions on every aspect of the question at hand.

This is absolutly NOT correct and should be a main concern while claiming the Foundation is independent and soley seperate:

• Foundation Board of Directors: 2 out of 5 Foundation Board Members are ECC Zcash Founders ( Matthew Green, Ian Miers)
• Foundation Community Governance Panel: The following ECC affilated person are as well active in the FCGP: Daira Hopwood (ECC), Jack Grigg (ECC), Sean Bowe (ECC), Simon Liu (Ex-ECC), Gordon Mohr (ECC Advisor), Christina Garman (ECC Zcash Founding Scientist), Eran Tromer (ECC Zcash Founding Scientist), Ian Miers (ECC Zcash Founding Scientist), Matthew Green (ECC Zcash Founding Scientist)