About the CCIP category

Council Proposals CCIP
1

CCIP

Submit Compliance Council Improvement Proposals (CCIP) to this channel for deliberation, feedback, and contestation by the community and Compliance Council related to Miner Council veto actions, altering authorizations and conflict resolution processes.

To be approved as an actor by the Compliance Council using the CCIP process, navigate to the Authorizations channel for that miner group.

CCIP Authority

The Compliance Council may use the CCIP process to:

  • Veto Proposals: The Compliance Council may veto any Miner Council proposals using the CCIP process at any point during the voting process and up to 72 hours after it has been approved by the relevant Miner Council(s).
    • Example: A CCIP proposal to veto a TELIP proposal that would distribute issuance from the TEL treasury beyond sustainable levels.
  • Alter Authorizations Process: The Compliance Council may introduce and alter new and existing authorizations processes.
    • Example: A proposal to create a KYC/AML process to verify the identity of new Council Members.
  • Alter Conflict-Resolution Processes: The Compliance Council may develop and refine conflict-resolution processes.
    • Example: A proposal to create a new conflict-resolution process using discord and google forms.

Using the CCIP process, the Compliance Council is required to:

  • Veto proposals that violate laws, rules, and shared values.
    • Violations: The Compliance Council must veto proposals with the following characteristics including proposals that are, Illegal, not compliant Telcoin rules-in-use, against the Telcoin shared values and/or code of conduct, and proposals that would result in a transfer of TEL units to an unintended address.
    • Rationale & Feedback: All Compliance Council members who vote to veto a proposal must share their rationale at the time of the vote with recommendations for the author.
  • Develop authorization and conflict resolution processes in the first month of the first term.
    • Authorization Process Development: The Compliance Council must develop and implement an authorization process for Council members within the first first month of its first term.
    • Conflict Resolution Process Development: The Compliance Council must develop and implement an authorization process for Council members within the first first month of its first term.

CCIP Proposal Template

  1. Abstract: Please share a brief summary 2-3 of the proposed changes.
  2. Specification: Please give a complete description of the changes that will be made.
  3. Rationale: Please provide a rationale for the changes.
  4. Implementation: Please provide details related to who will take what steps to implement the changes.

CCIP Documentation: Learn more about the CCIP process here.

2

CCIP1
This CCIP is for the proposal of removing 2 platform council members and revoking their NFT for lack of participation, missing meetings, and now missing voting on a improvement snapshot.

The 2 members to be removed are Mehdi, and Cath. Both have been spoken to about their lack of participation and we were told that it wouldn’t be a problem anymore. However, after further occurrences of missed meetings, a letter explaining the offences was sent to both members with a chance to explain themselves for perhaps another chance. Only Cath replied with the excuse that she was unable to attend but she was still voting when needed. We now have a missed vote to add to her offenses. Mehdi never even replied or voted.

This CCIP is looking to have both of heir NFT’s revoked and them removed from the platform council with the TAO taking their place for voting until the platform council decides how they want to go about filling the vacant spots.

After passing the upcoming snapshot to remove them, the Tao should remove the NFT’s and fill in for voting purposes. Upon that being done, the failed platform vote regarding the NDA’s should immediately be sent back to snapshot for a vote. If at all possible having the snapshot timeframe cut down from 5 days to possibly 48 hours to get us back on track with a seemingly “no brainer” vote.

6 Likes
3

any feedback? more about the way its worded not removing them

1 Like
4

Can we say that when all votes are in it is actioned immediately. …rather than waiting 5 days. They have already had significant Tel issuance and IMO that should stop asap

2 Likes
5

This vote is only 3 days but I would definitely like to see the re-vote for the NDA’s be cut down timewise to maybe 48-72 hrs as everyone is eager and ready

3 Likes
6

https://snapshot.box/#/s:telcoincompliancecouncil.eth/proposal/0x95e89ee99075c7d3654d7dcb71dbb2bd7e3761831a66004af240e881d8fd7fab

1 Like
7

Just a clarification point to be made here:

Following an approved CCIP, which requires 2 ‘For’ votes and at least 3 of 4 Compliance Council Members to vote on the proposal, the TAO will revoke the NFT from the council members, then substitute vote on behalf of the Miner Groups in that role and in parallel, the TAO will coordinate a liquid delegation ceremony. In this ceremony, the TAO will submit a forum post for potential candidates to nominate themselves. Potential candidates have two weeks to submit their nomination application to the new forum post. Then the Miner Groups who need to replace their representative(s) will vote on each of the candidates via snapshot.

2 Likes
8

I approve of this proposal; however, I do not have my signing key available to vote in time. Consider this my “For” vote for the proposal.
Thank you

3 Likes
9

Thank you everyone, there seems to be an issue with Snapshot on my end. I have the right voting token and set up but still not working. Amir has raised the issue with Snapshot but until it gets just wanted to make sure a note is made that I approve of this proposal - consider this my “For” vote for the proposal.

4 Likes