# Proposal & Possible Changes in the Foundation Governance **URL:** \ **Category:** Zcash Foundation\ **Created:** [July 15, 2019, 8:14am UTC](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/proposal-possible-changes-in-the-foundation-governance/34104 "2019-07-15T08:14:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 5
**Author:** ![boxalex](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/zcash/user_avatar/forum.zcashcommunity.com/boxalex/32/14872_2.png) [@boxalex](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/u/boxalex)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2019, 8:05pm UTC](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/proposal-possible-changes-in-the-foundation-governance/34104/5 "2019-07-14T20:05:27Z")
I have this in mind and my listing and hence i wrote > [@Placeholder Considerations: Resources, Governance, and Legitimacy in NU4](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/placeholder-considerations-resources-governance-and-legitimacy-in-nu4/34045/26): > > **affilated** with the ECC I made this listing of ECC affilated people due this argument which i think is not correct and somehow missleading if it doesn’t get corrected. > [@Placeholder Considerations: Resources, Governance, and Legitimacy in NU4](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/placeholder-considerations-resources-governance-and-legitimacy-in-nu4/34045/24): > > 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** , Beside that, who of these listed people has how much influence is out of our reach i guess. However, i think it’s safe to say that due their financial relation, be it the wage as an employee or shares of the founders reward as a founding member, at least suggests that they are way more affilated with the ECC than the foundation. In my opinion it’s a valid opinion and question to ask if such “design” of the foundations governance panel is the right setup. Have in mind i did not make a conclusion, just raised the question! From my (limited) knowledge it’s not common to have the same people in an organization which should act as a overviewieng, maybe even as a controlingl but for sure as a balancing counterpart. And don’t let’s forget that there are several “claims/statements” by the proposal maker(s) in this thread that the Zcash Foundation is absolutly independent which in my opinion due the fully financial dependence and ECC affilated people in the Foundation’s decision making boards & panels is not the case. > [@Placeholder Considerations: Resources, Governance, and Legitimacy in NU4](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/placeholder-considerations-resources-governance-and-legitimacy-in-nu4/34045/27): > > This is my personal opinion, but given the current role and position of the ECC within the Zcash ecosystem, it actually makes sense for the ZF board to have, among others, a member from the ECC. Maybe true, but like everything in the world it’s a trade-off. I’am not going as far as making a conclusion if it’s good or bad, that’s not my intention. I just show that the fully independent claim is not correct at all. > [@Placeholder Considerations: Resources, Governance, and Legitimacy in NU4](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/placeholder-considerations-resources-governance-and-legitimacy-in-nu4/34045/27): > > As far as the Governance Panel is concerned, I’ve been told that this was an ad hoc structure open to everyone. Depending on the circumstances, I think such structures could be useful or even necessary for providing venues for public discussion and deliberation. I don’t see why they should be closed to the members of the ECC, an organization that is arguably central to the life and success of the network. That’s absolutly correct and until these days i admit it even doesn’t raised any concern on my end. I even admit i have no idea who exactly decided who was able to join and who not than back. Anyway. While the Foundation government panel and having several ECC affilated people in it wasn’t a problem in the past (or at least nobody gave it much attention) i think there is currently reasoning it could be a conflict of interest. I can think of a lot of situations where this could create a lot of mistrust within the community for example. Which of course raises the question: Is this really ideal in case the foundation’s governance panel is used and ECC employees/founders/affilates vote on something again they anyway have allready decided internally at the ECC but now they vote in the name of the foundation? As said, until now when such governance panel is used for, let’s call it 3rd party decision this might be ok, even wishfull in many cases. But when there are decisions to be made where the let’s call it “core foundation” has a totally different opinion, than this foundation governance panel is somehow “undermined”. Just some thoughts … > [@Placeholder Considerations: Resources, Governance, and Legitimacy in NU4](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/placeholder-considerations-resources-governance-and-legitimacy-in-nu4/34045/27): > > This can happen in different ways and places, but the ZF board is obviously one of those, and perhaps a regular Community Governance Panel could be another. If i remember right the current panel is called " Zcash Foundation Community Governance Panel". Maybe a workshop would fit better for what you described as coming together and collaborate. And just but not least i reviewed the last “Zcash Foundation Community Governance Panel” results which show that in some cases every vote is indeed important. As this example fits perfectly into the discussion here a figure: ![Governance_Panel](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/zcash/original/2X/7/712d0ef224c7dbe5a6d08e763b39ea8ada0b5997.jpeg) --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/proposal-possible-changes-in-the-foundation-governance/34104)._