[VONC] Vote Of No Confidence - JP | Missionpoole

[abstract oracle]

**Vote of No Confidence (VoNC) Process Initiated by Community Member @native dagger **

Community member Garf has initiated a Vote of No Confidence (VoNC) regarding JP Mission Poole. The detailed process for how this VoNC will be handled is outlined here: https://snapshot.org/#/community.ilv-gov.eth/proposal/0xc95e5a2a407352124b3bd0addd185d91f1eee6563e447eeb8881c11e0cfd30f7

VONC Complaint via @native dagger:

• https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tx8DSY3oGAoKKGmK98hjycgPoOZzKZpRb164rC9OQpk/edit

Council Member @jaunty sparrow defense:

What this document fails to credit is the time spent on meetings (perfect or near-perfect attendance record in both the IMC/ICC) and in deep discussion with fellow members about props and community sentiment, and private discussion with community members (this IIP from relax its handled being a good recent example of something not tracked). It has always felt a little superficial to me to go into chambers and reiterate the same positioning provided by others on the council. I am aware that we should be doing it, it honestly is just not something I think to do as it feels rather redundant most of the time. 

For chatting in the community channels and such, I don't feel that Council's role is necessarily to moderate channels but moreso to understand the sentiment of what's happening in them. I do a lot of reading, not a lot of writing. It hasn't felt productive to argue with people in gen chat; I typically absorb the information or sentiment and take it back to private conversation and/or meetings. 

Furthermore, I am well aware that voting in a way that may go against some community sentiment causes big outcries. I have been receiving hate mail since I voted against IIP-58; I struggle to find the balance between voting for/against a prop based on the merit of the idea and the sentiment of the community. For that reason, this station has been particularly difficult for me to serve from.

TL;DR - I'm not perfect, certainly don't claim to be, and I know I have areas that I should improve on particularly as it relates to engaging with the community directly. It's a balance I have not done a very good job striking between superficialities, moderating, and actual Council-work. With all of that said, I think a VONC is a rather harsh sentence for someone that may not have been perfect but did show up and participate. If the community feels I am not a value-add on the ICC, I will respect that and not run for this Council for the next Epoch, but I would ask that I be permitted to finish out this Epoch in good standing. ```

### Results of Peer Evaluation:

Overall Average: 3.7 out of 5 

### Next Steps:

- This post will stay active for the 5 days, and if it receives the threshold vote of 50 upvotes it will then escalate to a DAO snapshot vote.

[native dagger]

Thank you Rich! And thanks Missionpoole for taking the time to write a defense.

Quick note: the imagery in the google docs is blurred when you check the document on the phone. I couldnt fix that. So please read the document on the computer and zoom in for non-blurred figures.

This timeline (figure 1 in the document) suggests that Missionpoole is only motivated to put in the required amount of effort when he is reminded by his peers, or is pursued by a VoNC, as his activity skyrocketed the week after the peerfeedback and during these last 3 days!

The peerfeedback of last June, however, gave missionpoole a 3.0 for governance participation showing that he put in the absolute minimum amount of effort into governance. No other councilmember was judged so harshly. Now with the provided data on votes and rationales, this value dropped further to a 2.5.

According to the official Governance V3 document, a value under a 3 calls for an automatic VoNC. Therefore I dont think this VoNC is a harsh sentence but merely a natural way to hold the council accountable when they have shown to not do their job.

[queen niche]

I want to say I appreciate you, Garf, for taking the time to write this and for gathering the community sentiment.

After reading JP's defense, I'm giving this both a thumbs up and a thumbs down.

I'm giving this a thumbs up because:

I envision a community council member's role as someone who bridges the gap between the community and the IMC/Illuvium team. The community needs to feel heard, and that can only happen through communication, with our Discord being central to that.

I understand there's a lot happening behind the scenes that we don't know about. It should be the community council members' job to help the community understand that and minimize the unknowns.

Also, if you're not engaging with the community in any way, shape, or form and are only reading and taking in what's being said, what differentiates that from a normal community member?

To me the icing on the cake was the https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1262012199703023616. I've shared my criticism in that post, so I won't go into it here. But it's a clear example of how out of touch some council members are with the community and the Illuvium ecosystem as a whole.

I'm giving this a thumbs down because:

Although I think a VONC is a bit extreme for underperformance, I believe having these tools is a good reminder that the council is getting paid to do a job. Recent JP activity clearly shows that.

That said, I don't think JP is the only council member underperforming, so it doesn't seem fair that he's the only one receiving this VONC. Besides, we're almost reaching the end of this epoch, so I see no need for this now.

[native dagger]

The reason for the late VoNC is the lack of peerfeedback this epoch. Since the term length for this council was increased to 9 months, the previous values for peerfeedback stated in IIP 35 became inaccurate. The values in IIP 35 applied to a 6 month term after all.

The final feedback round, according to IIP 35, would be 5 months into the term and be published close to the final month of the term. This would push council members to give it their all for the entirety of the term.

If a VoNC would come to pass, it would happen in or close to the final month and revoke the previous 3 months of salary if passed.

In a different scenario, the peerfeedback of last month would have given JP a value of less than 3 on governance participation. After all, JP had missed 14/24 or almost 60% of any governance related actions till that date.
This would have automatically issued a VoNC, and thereby have caused this to happen a month sooner.

Since the council did not feel the need to start a VoNC based on those numbers, i waited for yet another slip-up before starting this.

But issuing a VoNC in the final month of an epoch should not be an uncommon procedure based on IIP 35.
https://snapshot.org/#/community.ilv-gov.eth/proposal/0xbd9843d80117314f995a44aeb6195cc5fc9e7314f28713f19ee70193e542bdfe

[queen niche]

Ah gotcha, wasn't aware of that. Thanks for clarifying

[finite badge]

I am not going to vote as I am technically next in line.

I will express a point from @queen niche above. I feel that the councils in general have been underperforming. Especially the IMC, they received a large pay increase and have compensation that for most of the world would be a reasonable salary, yet I do not see full time or even part time effort towards the DAO. Being on council before I understand that a lot of it is not seen by the public, but I wish we would have had more visibility and active participation during this critical period.

With major oversights like the airdrop structure, it is frustrating to see such shortcomings. They can be positive experiences to enhance engagement, but now they have negative tones for parts of the player base. Why are community members being the first to raise the alarm, not council immediately rectifying and working on IIPs? I have seen some council members just playing the midfield not trying to piss off one side or the other of the player base, but they know what is right for the DAO and do vote accordingly. This leaves the burden on community members to make change instead of the people who were elected to do.

I will also state how I think many of us feel in general, whether we admit it or not; the launch is not what we were expecting. We are in a decent point in the overall crypto market and from my understanding we have decent runway still, but I feel this launch was half baked. Why?

Who are we to hold responsible if not the councils that are supposed to run this DAO.

There are major questions being raised as to why the game launched when it did and in the state of it. Especially pointing out gauntlet mode. If this was to be our main attraction, should it have not been more polished before launch. Did council agree with this strategy?

Should the airdrop points be centered around gauntlet, so we actually have players instead of bots when streamers are showing it to their audiences? Maybe expectations were that Gauntlet would be in a better state than it was by launch, if so I can understand, because a release date was announced and this time they needed to stick to the timeline. There may also be other factors that we can't see, that forced us to launch when and how we did, But some clarity would be great. There is also the potential that we will still have a huge growth spurt in the next couple weeks and push forward to 50K - 100K players

The game launched in a state where the NFTs have next to no utility, and the airdrop point structure is incentivizing more supply into the ecosystem instead of funneling them into a meaningful end game mode like ascendant or leviathan where we will actually use the epic teams we can build. This has led to major supply and falling floor prices that we see which I imagine will only get worse as fuel is introduced from land owners.

Should JP be the only one taking heat for this 1 month before the end of the epoch I don't know.

[native dagger]

I only give JP heat for underperforming in his participation in governance.

He is the main council liaison, is paid more than the other ICC members and should therefore be more liable than the other community council members. He got an extra stipend of 750$ per month to participate in meetings with the IMC and be the point of contact between the councils. His argument that he attended a lot of meetings and did a lot of work privately can be attributed to the extra tasks he encumbered himself with when the community council elected him as the liaison.

I do not argue that he was responsible for the state of the launch in any way, as that would simply be exaggerated and untrue.

This VoNC is one of underperformance only. 👍

[boreal garden]

I just want to say I have downvoted this mostly on the basis that he has done his duties as liaison incredibly well every single week, which isn't publicly recognised. He brings us all the relevant information coherently and doesn't miss a beat in those extra duties and this epoch would be a mess without his assistance there.

As for governance participation I have always seen that as a team effort especially when it comes to the ICC. For example, if 3 members are extremely active and they relay relevant information back to the rest of the team that should be more than enough for the ICC as a collective. If the community feels those needs weren't met then the entire ICC is at fault for that, not any individual. And if the community believes that every ICC member needs to be active everywhere always then that's a difference of opinion.

[abstract oracle]

Agree with you here. And will say I don't think “lack of peer feedback” is JPs fault, I was responsible for doing council feedback and was quite busy with multiple duties. Not an excuse but a reason why things like that were late. So impeach me probably as well.

[night escarp]

I second that.

[native dagger]

Voting and rationale from my perspective is a totally individual process as you should not be sharing the keys of the voting wallet or your discord details with your fellow councilmembers.

JP missed close to 30% of votes and 75% of rationales before the VoNC was issued.

I am glad to hear that his additional duties were not neglected to the same extent. But this does not take away that he neglected the most prominent area that the public can vet. The community council especially should have a duty towards the community. Imo, you dont get paid extra to then forsake half of your original duties. You should take that into consideration before taking on those extra paid tasks.

[boreal garden]

As I said. If the community views this differently that's fine too. I am just saying my peace.

Not sure what the voting keys or discord details thing is.

But yeah

[analog osprey]

Is there a mechanism in place that should trigger a warning if any council member is not actively voting and writing rationales?
If there isn’t maybe there should be. Whilst the community may not see what goes on behind the scenes we also can’t necessarily keep track of each vote on every topic.
Leaving other council peers to police each other may not be the best solution either as many council members have known each other a long time and may feel loyalty.
Clear guidelines around what is expected of council members and an automatic warning system and potentially automatic vonc proceedings might be a good fail safe and encouragement for the council to be accountable.

[gaunt viper]

There's no excuse for that many votes to be missed. TBH I was always confused why JP put himself forward as I thought he would be too busy for the role. This proves that is the case.

[jaunty sparrow]

Hey everyone, I just wanted to say I appreciate all of the feedback and take it to heart. Many of you reached out to me individually to discuss and that means a lot. My door will remain open for the Illuvium community and I’d love to continue connecting with you all.

I would also like to thank my fellow council members for their support. I’m certainly not perfect but I do love this project and take my responsibilities here seriously. I have no excuse or justification for missing the number of votes I did a few months back. I was very overwhelmed with work and did a poor job keeping track of everything on my plate. I’ll ensure that does not happen again and that my communication with the community improves.

Lastly I want to thank Garf for holding me and others accountable for what is best for the DAO. I am confident that we all want what is best for our community and I intend to earn back your trust.

Most respectfully,
JP