Provisional AA board review for ANV #4

Given the added 1 week community review period (I personally love it btw!), the AA board met to do an initial review of AGPs to provide some feedback about AGPs that will likely be rejected in the official AA board review to allow for some time to make changes before proposals are frozen and moved to Stage V.

The freeze will happen today at 1600 UTC, please edit your proposals accordingly!. We left some comments in almost all proposals which would be great if addressed before the freeze as well.

The following is not final nor official. There are no guarantees that the official review would be the same even if no changes are made. This was an initial pass and any proposal could be approved or rejected.

As of right now, all proposals currently in Stage IV look good for approval except for the following which will likely be rejected if unchanged:

  • Kleros proposal (@clesaege): it’s not formatted as an AGP. At the current state, it shouldn’t even make it to Stage V.
  • AGP authorship standards (@burrrata): the AA board thinks that this AGP is not relevant enough for this ANV given the high volume of proposals.
  • ScoutDAO (@burrrata): overlapping with the AA’s grants programs and overlapping with some ongoing work from the AA on revamping these programs. The AA considers it as a novel and interesting idea, but we think it deserves more attention and time.

There are currently 18 AGPs in Stage IV. We believe that this is a high number of AGPs and given their importance, some AGPs might be deprioritized for the next ANV, which if one of the AGPs passes would be in less than 8 weeks from this ANV. This is really important to ensure that ANT holders have the bandwidth to make an informed decision in such critical issues.

We were blown away by the quality of the AGPs in this cycle. Thanks everyone for contributing by writing AGPs and commenting in the forum. The governance process of the project is quickly maturing and it is so exciting to see.

Luis and Jorge


Can you please explain what you mean here? It seemed that the general consensus was to “unbundle” AGP proposals as much as possible. This creates a higher volume of proposals, but gives ANT holders discretion as to what they are voting on. How does this increased granularity in voting options warrant nullifying AGP authorship standards?

Agree that now is not the best time for ScoutDAO. Responded and replied in the ScoutDAO thread with details.

1 Like

I think the rationale here is just that there is a large number of proposals and ANT holders are struggling to go through all of them – I think in ANV-1 or 2 some proposals got postponed as well. I think it makes sense to postpone a couple of non-urgent ones until a later vote, this vote has featured the largest number of proposals ever!