Thanks @john_szczepaniak, for sure I am enjoying the biweekly newsletters, this part and many other things are very well done by the comms team. And also all the communication related to the gnosischain tech and what is of interest for a validator works very well as I see it.
What imho can be improved is the involvement of the community (which in part can also be regarded as members of the DAO) in shaping the gc ecosystem. To detail this is hard as I don’t know who plays which role (Gnosis DAO, Gnosis Ltd, Karpatkey) and decide which part on their own (or together after internal discussion).
Just an example where I felt left behind: didn’t noticed the bribing for staking crv to 3pool some time ago (I staked for 3pool soon after inception of the pool on gc and just by chance discovered I can claim some gno for this).
Also other activities like how veBAL voting is used is hard to follow up, e.g. in the latest treasury report it is stated: ‘Locked B-80BAL-20WETH for veBAL and AURA to increase and maintain the DAO’s voting power and voted for Gnosis Chain pools on Balancer and Aura’. Who decides on which pools are voted? Most likely Karpatkey is deciding this, but I doubt they do it without some communication with either ppl from GnosisDAO and/or GnosisLtd.
In general, I would say: As long as DAO funds are used for shaping the ecosystem the details could be discussed in public.
Some other aspects that show more open discussion might be useful can be found here: https://forum.gnosis.io/t/an-open-letter-to-the-gnosis-community/7720.
Fully agree on @auryn_macmillan that
Imho GIP-77 isn’t bad, but would be even more helpful if we would have a larger community here that likes to delegate. I would assume if more ‘insider’ topics are brought up here before decision is made this will attract people to join. Also it could be beneficial to see some more participation from insiders regarding some posts here that have been left without the notice they deserve. E.g. this or this (just my personal choice).
edit:
regarding
To me this seems less important, follow up reports are nice but it wont trigger participation (just consumption). Trying to involve ppl on matters early on is imho better suited to get more participation.