The primary topic of discussion during this call was the implementation of KIP-21.
KIP-21 extends KIP-12, which laid the foundation to build a more capable organization.
Priest and hazard debated the delegation of powers and potential conflicts of interest that exist with KIP-21.
Conflicts include the suboptimal discretion that officers have to determine their own compensation and budgets.
The general consensus is that the proper path forward is to proceed with the extension of KIP-21 and then propose a new KIP that amends the powers granted in the extension, rather than modify the existing proposal. New KIPs take precedence over old ones.
Failure to pass KIP-21 could potentially result in a budget freeze and have additional negative consequences for the project.
Conversely, granting too much power to individuals is dangerous, so a balance is needed.
Hazard made the case for “progressive decentralization,” in which components are solidified as they are deemed stable. However, he does not believe that hiring and budgeting have reached this point, due to a lack of performance grading and other necessary processes.
The success conditions of KIP-12 and KIP-21 would be moving towards a more permanent DAO structure, but this is likely to take more time.
There is passionate debate regarding these powers and the time frame for handing responsibilities back to the DAO.
A contested question: whether or not it’s worthwhile to take on the burden of proper decentralization in order to remove centralized power structures. Further discussion will be required.