LIP-6 Pre-Council Investments

Until we have completed the formal process of council elections, we hereby grant temporary authority to the core team to make investment decisions that are advised by existing advisors. This permission will be revoked upon council elections.

Kieran already stated on April 12 that we have missed out on seeding opportunities in both Nor and Civitas had the DAO been established. on April 18, he said he has two more “juicy ones” ready to go but we are not in a position to do so yet.

Let’s not be asleep at the wheel. Let’s grant this temporary permission so that we can utilize Kieran and the other advisors like the weapons they are. It is time to emerge from the underground to shock the world.

13 Likes

Proposal #: 6

Title: DRAFT LIP-6 Pre-Council Investments
Author: KakashiSama, Kieran Warwick, and most_dope
Date Created: 19th April 2022

This vote is to approve “pre-council” investments as detailed below:

ABSTRACT
This document proposes a change to grant temporary investment permissions to the Ethlizard DAO, specifically before the time that a 5 member fund management council is formally elected - subsequently written and referred to as “pre-council” investments for the remainder of the proposal. This would allow for the Ethlizard DAO to initiate these “pre-council” investments with the DAO treasury funds immediately upon LIP-6 approval.

Relevant Information:
The Ethlizard DAO investment fund council has still yet to be elected and installed. Elections are scheduled for May 2022.

The Ethlizard DAO treasury vault currently holds 341+ ETH. Up to 80% of this may be used for potential investments according to the DAO protocol.

Ethlizard staking contracts are already in development. These staking contracts relate to the investment reward distribution; Their current absence does not directly limit or withhold any ability for the DAO treasury to be used for investments immediately. Staking / RevDis solutions to specifically address these “pre-council” investments shall be resolved at a later date.

Post-council elections: In accordance with LIP-4, from the time that the fund management council election and installment occurs, all investment fund management responsibilities will be handled by the elected 5 member council. This will remain unchanged and is not affected by LIP-6.

MAIN CHANGES

  1. The Ethlizard DAO will be granted permissions and autonomy to make “pre-council” investments using DAO treasury funds for up to 3 unique investments. These 3 combined investments shall not exceed a maximum total limit of 85ETH (24.87% of DAO’s current treasury - around $255k). These “pre-council” investments could be made by the DAO in cases where:
    A. It is a seed/pre-seed investment deal passed along by an advisor.
    B. Investment decisions would be guided by advisor input and thorough analysis to be made towards the end goal of financial benefit for the Ethlizard DAO treasury.
    C. The Ethlizard DAO investment fund council has still yet to be elected and installed.
    D. The Ethlizard team would handle the administration on behalf of the DAO to execute the steps to complete any of these 3 “pre-council” investments.

  2. For these “pre-council” investments, the 5% fee that is normally reserved for the council, will be instead sent to the Ethlizard DAO treasury to be used for reinvestment.

RATIONALE
The council elections are still some weeks away, yet there are some promising investment opportunities that are available immediately. This LIP-6 proposes limited DAO permissions that would allow “pre-council” investments to occur immediately, thus providing earlier access to earning opportunities for the DAO.

Should we approve the DAO to be able to make these “pre-council” investments?

Voting options:
A. Yes
B. No
C. Abstain

10 Likes

I like the initiative of this new proposal.
I would also like the council elections to be held as fast as possible, but I think it still needs to be formalized and you also need time for the campaign itself. I’m not sure I’ll know everyone participating in the campaign and I want everyone to have the chance to show their credentials and visions as council members. If we rush this phase I’m afraid it will turn in more of a popularity contest than a skill based election.
So I support this temporary measure to get the ball running.
As long as we don’t sleep on the the council election !

4 Likes

Love the initiative and emotionally agree since we all just want to move toward the future.

Some Questions I think should be answered before moving forward with this:

  1. We know opportunities are going to keep coming up, that’s our entire premise. Why can’t we move up the council vote? What would prevent us from voting in the council with this vote instead of this? (Mainly would need the Team to answer as we see it as core functionality and wouldn’t just take it to a DAO vote). Time for campaigning sure but no one should need longer than 3 days.

  2. We shouldn’t just have a blanket approval, how much would go into each?

  3. Since it’s strictly Kieran, would Kieran receive the 5%?

  4. When would these take place, is it this week or in three weeks. If it’s three weeks, it leads to question 1.

3 Likes

Thank you for taking the time to reply! While I do not have concrete answers to your questions, I’d like to at least take a crack at them because I’m not sure if there is a definitive answer out there so maybe we can arrive together on a firm foundation moving forward.

  1. As a few others have said, I would rather not rush the council vote from its scheduled date in May; plus, if there are deals on the table now, we most likely have to act swiftly now in order to capitalize. I believe the current proposal is worded sufficiently so that we have a sound bridge until elections. Voting for the council members will most likely open many cans of worms and will probably take weeks to accomplish.

  2. Perhaps someone with more VC experience can chime in here on what a standard seed size is. My impression was 50-100k USD each

  3. I cant speak for Kieran, but I don’t think he wants to be in a position to take a payment from this DAO outside of many lizard distributions? Perhaps the 5% can be fed back into the treasury for deals started/completed during this interim period until elections are finalized

  4. I am hopeful to have the finalized vote for LIP-6 in snapshot within 48 hours but we’ll see how it goes. I do think it’s worth being mindful that elections could be complicated and take longer than one initially thinks with campaigns and important questions about term limits and all sorts of questions that may need to be resolved. So while I am hopeful LIP-6 will be launched by EOW, I think it will be completed at least a month before election results are finalized even if elections do start on time.

Again, just some thoughts as I’m not sure absolute answers to these some of these questions exist

3 Likes

Likewise, appreciate the response and dialog!

The others make sense and yea would look forward to learning about the potential sizing, typically it’s been stated it should be under $150k so even if we just say a max of $300k, I believe having a limit / detailed allocation is a good idea.

My one open ask is still out to the team:

People shouldn’t need longer than 3 days to make an intro video and provide credentials.
If the team isn’t ready because of X, it’s completely different. If we are trying to get others to apply, completely different. I’m just saying not knowing the answer and not asking just confuses me

5 Likes

Agree with speeding things up in the interim - all this waiting has been frustrating.

As suggested above, do include an appropriate $ amount or % of our funds into the preliminary proposal, ideally with some details on the nature of the investments (would need Kieran to provide).

A snapshot of our wallets would also need to be taken for revdis eligibility – don’t know how this works, but somebody needs be responsible for this and be keeping track.

Staking also isn’t ready yet, so that complicates things. We don’t know when these investments will be liquidated either and lizards may have changed hands by the time rewards are distributed. How’s this going to work?

As an aside, a source of frustration I’m seeing is, a portion of the community wants to be more involved but there are few avenues to do so aside from twitter raiding and governance bickering. Maybe it’s time for the team to find some ways to harness the power of the community instead of (seemingly) wanting to do everything on their own. It feels as if all we could do is to wait, wait, and wait!

5 Likes

Since staking is still not ready. Maybe just increasing our treasury vault size could be an objective.
I thought about taking a screenshot or something of all the wallets currently holding a lizard, and taking one when liquidating assets. and matching those who still have the same, calculating the revdis that way. But i think is way complicated and messing it up is easy.

im all for going forward. but we should also make sound foundation, also it would be great for this particular LIP to have X Votes minimum. We only a few of us were to vote and pass the LIP and mess up, it would bring distress to the comunity.

I’m not personally concerned about the nature of the investments as long as the amount is disclosed and it falls into the GameFi bucket, which I assume is a given. What exactly would you like to hear more in terms of details?

I agree on seed amount transparency but I believe I have been working with an appropriate assumption of 50-100k USD per seed. I am open to be enlightened by anyone here, but the proposal places a limit on 3 such investments. So a limit of ~300k USD is sort of in place, and perhaps we can cap it there or at 100k per seed, etc.

Since these investments won’t be sold before staking is implemented, I do not foresee any complexity here because once staking goes live, those who stake will receive accrued “credit” for these initial investments.

I have set a proposed limit to the 3 investments totaling a maximum limit of 85ETH (24.87% of DAO treasury - around $255k). Keeping in mind that perhaps another 50-100k+ USD would be replenished via incoming OS royalties around the time the council would be voted in.

I do think the 5% council fee needs to be clarified where it would go since the work in this case is literally just making the investment (in the future the council will be asked to do lots of research, vetting and discussion that it sounds like won’t be needed at all for these temporary investments coming from Kieran). Could it go to DAO treasury for reinvestment?

A solution for RevDis tracking is needed. I.e. How to track and who to reward the funds from these “pre-staking” investments.

Ok so you’re suggesting a “whoever stakes down the road will be eligible for the revdis of these 3 investments” approach. Vs a “whoever owns a lizard now will be eligible for the revdis of these 3 investments down the road”.

If so, I agree, this makes sense and could encourage more people to stake their lizards when the time comes.

Conveniently, the justification for including the nature of the investments are outlined in the just released LIP-7.

"Quality of projects submitted to the DAO for a formal evaluation would be higher quality knowing that if they are found lacking, they would be openly shared with the GameFi community as such.

Retail investors and gamers over time would shift to using ‘EthLizard Approved’ as a standard with confidence that due diligence has been performed by a professional team. Specific returns could of course not be provided but investors could have confidence that a project is not a rug. This will continue to develop broader user adoption of web3 technology while expanding the EthLizard brand."

My key concern is that this proposal may be perceived as the sidestepping of proper investment appraisal procedures in favour of an emergency measure and may set a bad precedent. I.e. It wouldn’t do to be able to so easily overturn the measures which we may have put into place to safeguard against certain risks.

Not saying that it’s the case with this proposal - as it exists mainly because the council and appraisal measures aren’t in place yet and we’re missing out on financial opportunities as a result. The team ought to be making it their key priority to get the council elections ready the soonest possible.

The V2 version of this proposal has been moved to the top of this thread to replace the V1 version for easier viewing and to make it less confusing.

Thanks to everyone for their helpful suggestions and comments.

2 Likes

@most_dope while the proposal has shifted from the “team” over to the “DAO”, I would like to acknowledge your contribution and credit you for helping to kickstart the initiative to get LIP-6 moving.

3 Likes

Just to be clear I receive no financial benefit from any investments that I introduce to Lizard DAO.

10 Likes