Noted what you dont know, ive watched this train grow, while others trickle in with incentive.
As long as the vote is 1 to 1 a true decentralized vote… and its done by the community, then I will back and pump and chiron who wants to take the step forward.
Unsure what your first paragraph means?
The idea is to bring decentralization into all areas of the network yes.
to add, many of the activities that you, chirons, have run were very visible outside of Discord (on X) which has been fantastic. I think the Pythians can do more with the right resources hence why I believe such a council would enable.
What you mentioned entirely proves it’s not decentralized nor transparent enough and the CFPs should be the same as the PFP votes.
My understanding of the Council, at least probably not for a majority of it’s member, is to empower and manage community initiative and community leaders (Chiron) , listen to the suggestion, handle conflict and take decision on the day to day situation.
It’s also to make the magic happen on a “team support” and budget standpoint with more autonomy vs. the current structure where most of this needs to go through Pepito and Chop.
To me this Council is not the good structure for Business Development efforts in the sense you see it.
If the team is looking for a Swat Team for Business Development I think this should be done within the corporate structure with it’s appropriate payroll/budget. Personally I dont think that it is but would be curious to have @Chop or @Pepito confirmation.
Might be off target here so please enlight me.
All the above with all my respect for everyone but I think that further the conversation goes, the less I can get my head around the proposal.
500$ USD in Pyth per month to be honest is quite cheap if BD is to be a central/important focus of the Council. I also think that BD should not interfere in the community management and I think these two ideas should be separated. It’s one thing to assist/organize/empower events and this type of thing. But it’s another to have a main focus the growth of the project.
Speaking of Decentralisation, I dont see how a Community Council can acheive that. Holder are holder, stakers are stakers. The is quite a concentration of power. I’m not sure how this Council could actually change this. Maybe we should have considered wallet concentration when the DAO was created in the first place but I dont think there is any mechanism right now to make sure the “powerful” wallets power is niveled to encourage Decentralization.
Basically my thoughts and well written. As everyone has answered my simple questions the biggest thought on my mind was, is this another project growing role not actually on the team. If you want above and beyond then just add a community team. Pay them, get full effort. Enough time is volunteered. 500 a month is good for 9 hour’s a month of work or labour.
I do not expect the council to work on BD initiatives. But i do hope that with their work on the internet, they contribute to it by growing the Pyth presence. They won’t be ‘selling’ Pyth integrations and so on. But I’ve seen TL, JSN, and others shill Pyth in other communities.
As for this, i might miss context. But in my mind, the council takes much power from Pyth contributors (CMs like Chop, Ed, Mario, Marc, me) and takes a much larger ownership of how the community is ran. With a budget, freedom to launch things without contributors’ approvals and so on.
My 2c 
This why we’re here to “discuss” its ideas bank we all make this better it is merely proposal v1 for now
This yes, well observed imo,
The Chiron are here needed & to stay, the council is the decentralization & no need to rely on PDA or our current team leaders for every decision made.
Full autonomy will exist & decided by us, the pyf
This should be done through CFPs and PFPs as they’ve always been done in DAOs, meaning the council and the price feed council both fall under the DAO, any resources necessary comes from the DAO after proposals and voting based on governance tokens. And the reason why this will always default to be the only thing that makes sense is the simple proof of consensus.
If someone is taking charge as a council member for external activities, they propose it, voted, then granted to use the funding for xyz activities. When I mentioned internal and external community it is a very simple definition:
Internal community - existing community members
External community - 350+ ecosystem community members we need to cross pollinate with
It is not a single “BD” that helps to be the intercommunity bridge but to have them along with every other function on the council as well as collaborative partnerships with centralized organizations to drive growth - therefore, external community.
Thanks for the confirmation. I have been talking about Pyth in all communities I’m involved cause I believe Pyth is a great project with great Tech and a great Team. Chiron have actually been doing this actually on X and in many Discords without actually being explicitly required/requested and I think it’s a very powerful way to get the message out.
I was referring to @eileen stating Douro and PDA “should not be the only (…) growth effort for decentralisation and automomy purposes”. I just dont think this is possible for any other entity to take the required actions to increase decentralization. In the current stated any proposal can be pushed forward or defeated with the implication of the Top 10 wallets.
Dont get me wrong, I believe in the vision but I want to make sure I understand the mandate of the potential Pyth Community Council.
I do think that some duties/responsibilities/powers should be delegated to make sure the structure is agile and responsive. I think there is many things to handle on the Community side at higher level and handling all of it in a team of 2 can be quite challenging.
Only knew of some so thanks for educating me some more 
Let’s industrialize even more with more people and more focus IMO
As for the second part, I personally wouldn’t want the council to have to go through community/DAO votes for stuff they want to do. Would defeat the purpose of a council which should have an agenda and can act to the best of its abilities.
However, I could see ‘bigger’ projects that require some extra funding to be proposed here (the forum) with temp checks where the community members can voice their opinions and vote (1 person 1 vote) so no stake comes into play.
After that, it would be up to the PDA to approve as these are non-binding and can be unilaterally turned down
Going through some sort of voting should be appliable for bigger initiative. It’s up to the DAO to determine was is a “bigger initiative”. But going with votes is slow, time consuming, to be honest not quite interesting on a day to day basis for the vast majority of the retail holders.
It does give the impression that decision are “made by the DAO for the DAO” but to me it can easily kill innovation and responsiveness. I also think the considering the current weight of the top holders/stakers is too big to actually give considered the votes as Decentralized in it’s “pure” definition. Concentration is Centralization in a DAO.
With a coherent selection of Councilator I think we can achieve a more coherent results in terms of having some of the key decisions (community wise) handled by individuals external to the DAO, the big holders and the Contributors. It’s a very interesting step towards decentralization IMO.
I think we already have a good timeframe on 7days type voting/decision. It’s always hard to balance which is why I have never truly believed in DAOs functioning as it has intended to, but Pyth has already established grounds for a DAO and I think intent matters.
DAOs approach in scaling and mutual economic benefits (subDAOs and subOrgs), one of which is Yield Guild Games, capable of functioning as a DAO, generate revenue as well as do subDAOs at scale. This is also the reason why I think council formation and council members needs to be people with experiences in respective areas for growth. Plenty of things can be learnt from people with experiences as long as no ego gets in the way. In my previous org where we’ve transformed from pre-DAO to post-DAO and onchain governance we’ve had multiple approved proposals growing the brand, use cases, some have form entities within eco. The only step I would re-do is rethink everything on accountability and reputation and make it impossibly hard for people to leave once they’ve received funding. It was the most direct and open approach when everything is based on proposals, but it was also the worst decision. I prefer to be in a world where there are true ownership and respective consequences and not appreciation awards.
I like the idea that Credence proposed earlier. If we consider his model - 2 Council members for Education, 2 for running Social Media and 2 for Collabs/Partnerships + we take Eileen’s idea that only professionals and/or people with experience in respected fields should be allowed to be elected to the Council and combine all this with the primary idea that basically any active/valid community member can be elected for the position then this will not work.
Unless we elect such people once and they will remain in the position in the Council for many terms since there is no limit on consecutive terms? If we consider the criteria that only experienced community members should be elected, of course. But it doesn’t sound right, it’s a Community Council - it’s supposed to be done by the community for the community.
If you read about the responsibilities again, the duties of the Council are mainly focused on internal growth. Participating in the governance/Forum, boosting community engagement, educating people about PYTH both in Discord and on X is what we have already been doing and focusing on heavily. The difference is that Council members get to communicate with other teams about collabs etc and running bigger events occasionally. I am not using BD here since Pepito mentioned it won’t be expected from the Council members. But realistically, no one is expecting that future Council members - if this proposal ever passes the vote of course - to go ahead and start DMing every single team on all 60 blockchains about benefits for PYTH stakers and run crazy events on a daily basis.
It may be overkill for the moment, your comment is on point, but we know we will need it at some point soon. I think its better to experiment the model now and be able to test it out while we are not 1M strong.
We are building the future, not waiting for the future to impose itself.
Love the specialized chiron idea … it could make for more focused initiatives … worth a try, with or without election …
“Community for the community”, the protocols and dApps are literally within pyth community?!
Why wouldn’t we want the best possible talents with more experiences on exponential growth to help the pyth community?
I’m confused by the reoccurring focus on BD? BD is just one function, to have an event happen it will require a lot more than that.