Castle agrees on the importance of facilitating governance onboarding. We are very well familiar with the intricacies of the DAO and this is surely a positive addition.
We have a few comments on this:
- Is there more information on the demand for these analysts from protocols? and why do they need so much oversight?
- are there any successes and findings from V1 that can be leveraged to refine the scope of this proposal?
- Why has the sample been chosen as 20 analysts? we’d love to see a program open to a broader range of analysts, to maximize its impact, or at least learn more on this matter.
We’d also want to make sure that the proposal as it stands doesn’t end up after the two-month period: do you have any plans for what will happen between the protocols and the analysts?
Is there any plan to make sure the work done retains its impact beyond the timeline?
The last point concerns the budget. While it is in line with other programs, it is unclear how the dao will benefit from this program, given the protocols’ lack of clear demand for analysts. Of the proposed costs, only $30k will end up going to analysts, with the majority going to op expenses.
While we believe in principle in the need for strong governance participation, we will not be in favour of this proposal without these elements.