Should Decentraland Establish a Board of Technical Experts? This proposal has been PASSED by a DAO Committee Member (0xfb1afa4dc069ffb47b19dbee196045d508fcd5a2)

Should Decentraland Establish a Board of Technical Experts? This proposal is now in status: FINISHED. Voting Results: * Yes 63% 3,295,628 VP (81 votes) * No 36% 1,864,620 VP (11 votes) * Invalid question/options 1% 3 VP (1 votes)

I find the idea interesting although I have some concerns about this, such as in what areas exactly should they be experts? I also want to mention that @Morph's first comment makes a lot of sense, however I don't know how busy the GSS members may be in their current work, so suggesting a greater burden for them may not be the most appropriate if we want them to execute your work efficiently. I am voting yes because I think it is a useful proposal that can have many advantages, I would also love to see this proposal in more detail on this, so I hope to be able to raise my doubts in the next phase.

Fewer squads and better coverage from the existing ones. I agree with Morph. I don't understand why we need to spend so much money on supporting grants. The individuals receiving grants should be competent enough to carry out the work they've requested funding for. There should only be 1 accountability squad.

If the board serves as advisors and not the sole decision makers then yes, but why would we need a board then? Maybe just appoint several community members as "Technical Mentors/Advisors" and reward them in some way. :+1:

Absolutely agree - I mentioned it for this specific request because I believe it is a current shortfall of GSS and would make them more effective.

I feel like it makes more sense to have a modular system where there are as few people as possible working under any one core unit grant or committee. I fear a world where a core unit grant covers so much scope that people feel forced to vote yes because it is doing vital services, even though the budget has become bloated and inefficient. Not that it doesn't make sense to have the GSS handle this particular role, I can understand the desire to keep the group of people intended to support a creator from start to finish separate from the people analyzing if the creator is competent. Like a public defender vs a state attorney.

Voting Yes on the need for those skill sets but No for any new committee.

Why not revise the GSS members with users that actually play & understand decentraland, They usually have a good understanding of SDK, 3D Art & everything that comes with it.

Well said Morph, voting no as I think this is something that should fall on GSS. How many squads and committees will we create, pay an absurd amount of money to just delegate work to the next squad/committee that gets proposed?

Voting yes because I believe the concept should be elevated to a draft, but with the hope of a few changes. I don't think a whole new committee should be created that serves as a separate entity but should be merged with the current GSS either by adding members to the GSS that have expertise in various areas or by making it a requirement that to be a GSS member they must meet one of the expertise areas.

Maybe this budget needs to be increased for technical moments ? [https://governance.decentraland.org/proposal/?id=d9de3350-edcd-11ed-ac2d-876c6fc9416f](https://governance.decentraland.org/proposal/?id=d9de3350-edcd-11ed-ac2d-876c6fc9416f) 

Dude, are you corrupt? The way you vote, little reasoning when voting yes for shit grants but you vote no on this because a new committee isn't needed? I agree, a new committee isn't needed but the concept is needed, and this is the pre-proposal stage. I voted invalid for you for you in the Strategic position because you were also applying for the Dao Committee position which I also voted invalid because there was a better candidate for me than you @SinfulMeatStick :heart_eyes_cat: but now I wish I voted NO because you genuinely suck both at your job but also as a paid co-worker!!!

Would this board of experts be paid? From DAO treasury? How long would members "hold office"? "The community is responsible for choosing the experts." After watching the DAO comittee election fiasco im a little wary of community elections. Especially with the current imbalanced distribution of VP. If we ever develop a working and realiable badge/reputation system linked to DCL profiles it could help with member selection? The board could be made up of users with the top reputation in a series of categories with terms expiring and refilling every quarter or year. Board member opinions could be given sway in the DAO by deligating them large amounts of VP similar to how Esteban is delegating currently. Maybe this idea is too congressional/ representative governmenty, but if we can get a reputation system to actually work at least this would be semi automatic and based on merit instead of popularity and connections.

Adding to the existing GSS makes the most sense. Consolidate the effort so that your expertise can synergise

A new committee isn't needed. Add to GSS whatever technical position necessary. I believe by doing so the team will be better rounded especially when required to review a grant that may need to be sent to Revocations for technical inefficiencies.

In my opinion, this can be achieved by expanding scope of gss/gov squad. No need for a new board.

Why is this not a requirement of at least one GSS member itself? GSS would stand to gain a lot from having technical members. I originally thought this was the point of the GSS in the first place. They should be reviewing all grants for feasibility and whether the amount requested is a reasonable expectation for the tracked output throughout the process. I have been informed that the GSS is responsible for helping/assisting grantees - but why would grantees need assistance to implement their grants? Shouldn't we only be approving grants made by those already intimate/familiar with DCL implementations? Would it not make more sense that the GSS is to represent the best interests of the DAO itself and ensure we are not being scammed via basic technical & financial oversight? We are paying a solid salary to the GSS members, we should be able to find a member for it that meets the technical expectations, and if we can't - a new squad isn't going to change that.