# Governance Director Roles (previous proposal) **URL:** \ **Category:** TELIP\ **Created:** [July 10, 2026, 8:36pm UTC](https://forum.telcoin.org/t/governance-director-roles-previous-proposal/851 "2026-07-10T20:36:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![CryptoSteveO](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex032/user_avatar/forum.telcoin.org/cryptosteveo/32/39_2.png) [@CryptoSteveO](https://forum.telcoin.org/u/CryptoSteveO)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2026, 8:36pm UTC](https://forum.telcoin.org/t/governance-director-roles-previous-proposal/851/1 "2026-07-10T20:36:24Z")
_Revisiting the Governance Director Proposal_ As the Telcoin Association and its governance framework continue to mature, I’d like to reopen discussion around a proposal originally authored by Andrew Pinch regarding dedicated Governance Director roles. Original proposal: > [@TELIP: Governance Director Roles for Telcoin Association](https://forum.telcoin.org/t/telip-governance-director-roles-for-telcoin-association/722): > > Abstract This proposal introduces two new full-time, election-based Governance Director positions within the Telcoin Association. One role will oversee the Platform and Treasury Councils, while the other will oversee the TELx and TAN Councils. These positions are designed to improve the operational efficiency, transparency, and accountability of Council functions across the Telcoin DAO ecosystem. Each position will be compensated 12 million TEL per year, subject to annual review based on token… While this proposal did not gain significant traction when it was first introduced, the Association has evolved considerably since that time. There is multiple governing bodies, an expanding ecosystem, increasing proposal activity, and a broader range of responsibilities than existed when this was originally discussed. I’d like to ask whether the underlying problem it sought to address has become more relevant today. Some discussion points for the community: Has the Association reached a point where governance administration requires dedicated operational support? Are Council members being asked to balance strategic governance responsibilities with increasing administrative and coordination duties? As governance activity grows, how do we ensure proposals, action items, reporting, and cross council coordination continue to scale effectively? Would dedicated governance operations improve transparency, accountability, and execution while leaving all governance authority with elected Councils? If operational support is needed, what would be the most appropriate model? Full-time roles, part-time positions, elected appointments, contracted services, or another approach entirely? My intention is not to advocate for a predetermined solution, but to encourage a constructive discussion about how the association should evolve as our ecosystem continues to grow. Good governance isn’t only about making sound decisions, it also requires effective execution, clear communication, transparent reporting, and consistent coordination. As the association expands, it’s worth discussing whether our current governance structure is sufficient for the years ahead or whether additional operational/management support should become part of that conversation. I’m interested in hearing perspectives from association members, Council, contributors, and the broader Telfam community. Has the time come to revisit this concept, or do you believe our current governance model is sufficient as the ecosystem starts/continues to scale? Thanks! CryptoSteveO ---
**Author:** ![CryptoSteveO](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex032/user_avatar/forum.telcoin.org/cryptosteveo/32/39_2.png) [@CryptoSteveO](https://forum.telcoin.org/u/CryptoSteveO)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2026, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.telcoin.org/t/governance-director-roles-previous-proposal/851/2 "2026-07-16T11:06:41Z")
I see this is on the agenda as a talking point, but unfortunately, I’m unable to attend today’s meeting. I wanted to leave a few thoughts behind regarding this proposal. First, I want to give full credit to Andrew, who authored the original Governance Director proposal. I’m simply bringing it back for discussion because I believe it’s even more relevant today than when it was first introduced. My intent isn’t to criticize the councils or suggest that additional governance is needed. Council members have an important responsibility, and this proposal is meant to support that work, not replace or complicate it. As the Association continues to grow, we’ll naturally see more members, more proposals, more initiatives, and more coordination required across councils. That’s a good problem to have, but it’s also something to prepare for. The idea behind governance Directors is simple…let councils focus on governance while dedicated operational support helps track proposals, coordinate activities, document action items, and improve communication throughout the ecosystem. To me, the biggest benefit is creating greater transparency and clarity not only for the councils, but for the entire community and future customers/partners. Interested parties should have a clear understanding of where proposals stand, who’s responsible for the next steps, and how decisions progress through the governance process. Whether this proposal moves forward or simply starts a broader discussion, my (and Andrews) goal is the same. Let’s help build a polished, effective, and successful governance structure that scales alongside the continued growth of the Telcoin ecosystem.