Thank you for this deliverable, was a really good reading.
On the framework: we need a way to simplify how we do stuff in the dao. Especially the stuff that we need and that in real world requires a few decisions (do we want to do it, how much do we want to pay for it, who is going to do it, what is the expected outcome). This set of questions that normally are followed by a sometimes brief action are translated in tedious votings and back and forth in our dao. I am all positive on it, as long as the selection of provider and whitelisting is a robust process prone to being open to new participants with constant checks and balances.
As said in the chat, the main concern, not necessarily tied to this proposal, is the trend we will see in next few months of saying: opco is key, will have THIS role here.
Opco will indeed be key, we just risk being the dao so broad that we assign to it very diverse tasks and roles, outside of mandate, or even inside the mandate but that requires so many different expertise that it could be problematic to have the right persons in place. We are, basically, starting to shape an entity that is not out there yet.
I think is fine up to some degree and I think is also normal, let’s just all be collectively mindful of this outcome in which opco becomes a jack of all trades before even being born. I also know is a bit outside of scope of this convo, sorry for going a bit off topic.