ATOM Accelerator DAO Transparency Report 7

Atom Accelerator DAO - Transparency Report 7 1200×800 227 KB Report Date: July 30, 2024 Table of Contents • Overview • 1. Financial Reports • Balance Sheet - Main and Strategy Wallets • Balance Sheet - Operational Wallets • Income Statement - Primary Wallets (Main & Operational) • Income Statement - DAODAO Main Wallets • Income Statement - DAODAO Operational Wallets • Cash Flow Management Report - Strategy Wallets • Cash Flow Management Report - Main Wallets • Cash Flow Management Report - Operational Wallets • Hedging Operations • 2. Oversight Committee Election • Election Overview • Election Process • Voter Engagement • Election Challenges • Election Results • Updates from Elected Oversight • Official Appt Details • Oversight Salary Disbursement • Github Repository • Office Hours • Grant Process • Enhancing Transparency & Ed in Grant Evaluations: Scores, Notes • Grace Period • 3. Transparency • 2023 Retrospective • “Transparency Drive” • Team Addition/Departures • Oversight Committee Composition, Transition & Recruitment Process • 4. Grants • Enhancing Transparency & Education in Grant…

Excerpt (1190 of 62357 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

I obviously just skimmed the report for now but can already say, massive respect. This is impressive. Thank you a lot.

Tl;dr Executive Summary of AADAO Transparency Report #7: 1. Financial Reports : • Detailed financial reporting provided for main, operational, and subDAO wallets. • Balance sheets, income statements, and cash flow management reports included for all wallet types. 2. Oversight Committee Election : • Grace Yu elected as community representative through first-ever Cosmos Hub Governance election. • High voter engagement, with turnout around 59% for all candidates. • Proposal #920 for Grace received more participation (ATOM deployed in voting) than the ATOM 2.0 proposal ( #82 ), and nearly matched the participation of the ATOM Halving proposal ( #848 ). • Grace won the election with 60,856,064 ATOM , which was 5,439,569 more ATOMs than the runner-up (a 9.8% advantage). • 90% of “No” votes for Grace came from just three validators: Informal, Swiss Staking, and Strangelove. • Election highlighted need for improved voting processes and active supervision during elections. • Grace’s role is 35% Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) with a compensation bracket of $45 to $65 per hour 3. Transparency Initiatives : • Grace built GitHub repository for AADAO information . •…

Excerpt (1196 of 4184 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

To echo another discussion currently taking place within this forum about ICF transparency (link here), we would like to emphasize the visible efforts being made on the AADAO’s front. While AADAO has faced its own criticisms in its early days, unlike the ICF, whose actions are still eagerly awaited, AADAO has acted promptly. The extensive reports released publicly by the DAO demonstrate their commitment to transparency and their dedication to the Hub’s community.

It’s important to recognize how time-consuming and resource-intensive it is to produce such detailed reports and maintain transparency. We should appreciate those who adhere to these standards, and it appears AADAO is doing just that. We want to express our gratitude for their efforts and encourage the continuation of this practice in the foreseeable future.

StunZeed:

massive respect.

Agreed, respect. Also, thank you Cosmos_Nanny for the TL;DR.

Govmos:

unlike the ICF, whose actions are still eagerly awaited, AADAO has acted promptly.

Agreed, the promptness is extremely appreciated.

Thank you for recognizing the effort invested in producing the transparency reports. These reports are not solely the product of Oversight, but rather a collab effort involving Strategy, Grants, Operations, Ventures and Comms. While Oversight is responsible for project management wrt transparency report production, it should be noted that the overall curation of the report is achieved through a consensus-based process across committees. “Curation” refers to the selection of the most relevant and urgent items for reporting. It is a common misconception that transparency equates to a comprehensive log of all activities. Such an approach would not only be impractical but would also impose significant time and economic costs/challenges. This level of detail would more accurately be described as surveillance rather than transparency. There’s odious transparency. And there’s effective transparency. I’m a proponent of the latter. The information I seek, and the information conveyed via reporting is driven by disclosure of material information pertinent to decisions and considerations where community involvement and awareness are crucial. The objective is informed participation…

Excerpt (1199 of 2019 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗