ShapeShift has maintained a stellar reputation of support through its centralized years, and as we transition to a DAO, I’d like to keep that same level (and make it even better) of support for users as they navigate the unchartered waters of DeFi. When interacting with one of your most prize possessions, YOUR CRYPTO, support and documentation should be readily available and frequently updated.
Below is the proposal to open the Support workstream and begin organizing for the needs ahead.
*** Why should people use this workstream? What is it for?**
This workstream will be for any DAO participants that want to contribute to the “D to C” (DAO>Customer) interactions relating to education, technical support, and funneling DAO news to users. Customer Support should remain a priority during this transition to ensure education is being disseminated accurately and clearly to users.
*** How exactly is this different than the other categories we already have?**
It will focus on the D to C relationship, bringing the human touch to the everyday interactions with the DAO… with an emphasis on documentation and DeFi education.
*** What is the mission of this workstream?**
Facilitating ease of use for experienced DeFiers and creating solid documentation and educational events for novice DeFiers.
*** What are the goals of this workstream?**
Establish a support team to respond 7 days a week to individual questions, create a public repository of documentation for the ShapeShift DAO features/services, and promote best crypto practices through educational documentation, events, and alerts.
*** What metrics can this workstream’s success be measured against?**
Customer satisfaction surveys
First touch ticket times
Traffic to documentation (using Google Analytics)
What should topics in this category generally contain?
Support team proposal ideas
Documentation ideas/suggestions
International discussion on support (including translations and inclusivity)
Crypto education (security best practices, little known facts on certain wallets/services, hacks in the crypto space)
Do we need this category? Can we merge with another category, or subcategory?
Yes. This is a crucial pillar to the success of the DAO. 1f603
Will your workstream hold recurring meetings?
Yes. Weekly with appointed team members. Monthly with community members to teach processes on new features.
We have been using Zendesk and have a Discord/Zendesk integration waiting in the wings to test in the coming weeks, but I’d be curious people’s opinion on which software to move forward with. I prefer Zendesk because of all of the integrations and their flexibility as a service. The cost is not prohibitive if managed correctly - which I’m highly experienced in - and would ensure that customers who AREN’T discord savvy (we must remember that not everyone will join Discord) have a place to send in requests in a traditional fashion.
Zendesk also allows for a repository of documentation to be further built and organized. Zendesk also allows for public interaction with documentation making this a more decentralized “wiki-style” experience if we’d like.
I am, however, curious if others want to discuss other ways of organizing materials.
I also would like to spend some time finding some writers for the documentation part of this workstream. We have a lot of technical support agents that are talented and experienced in customer support, but we are in need of writers with solid crypto experience. Please share with any friends to have them join our Discord to begin learning about some opportunities to contribute to this workstream.
I am on board with this. I think zendesk should be kept and the discord side seperate. (So that it is a tiered approach to problems.) Discord/forum/TG/Reddit/etc could be first contact points, with basic help, if its beyond the first layer, a zendesk ticket made. (and maybe reported back?) Tying the systems together for a cohesive work flow, is my idea of a great system.
This sounds good and I’m in support of this work stream.
I’m curious if there is any platform/wiki that could be used instead of Zendesk. I’m not opposed to Zendesk, but I know it can be costly and requires a central authority to manage it. Who/What entity would have ownership over the Zendesk account?
In general I’m in full support of this workstream. Would be over-joyed if is thinking of leading it. Also curious to see the budget needs.
ps - Thanks for giving me a nice example of a workstream creating proposal. I will reference this as I create a proposal for an engineering workstream.
what is the cost for ZenDesk? I like the idea of using something that is free and open source, would be more attuned to our ethos. However, I am also aware of the effort required to switch such systems and am leery of adding an effort like that on top of all the work required to transition to a DAO. Curious if you have a sense of how much work that would be, and more curious if your intuition says anything about whether now is the time for that?
Notion is a free option and something I think we will begin to transition to no matter what.
a open google docs system
github
??? open to suggestions
I want the ability to update & republish content quickly, but I think this could be possible with the comments and feedback system in Zendesk. Zendesk also offers a ‘Community’ section where users can submit info/questions/documentation that could then be converted to an official piece.
I think a “central authority” in this case is ok. This documentation is leading users on how to manage their funds which requires a lot of care and if decentralized (in the short term) would require a lot of oversight/voting to make small changes to ensure a hacker didn’t adjust documentation to lead people the wrong way.
This central authority (potentially being a team I build) would have my reputation (and my team’s) backing it. At least until we have a blockchain based documentation solution 1f603
The cost is based on how many agents you have working. 1 agent = 1 license. At our current rate it’s about $100/agent per month…we have roughly 20 licenses. That includes other departments that currently have access…I predict the cost could be cut down to $1k-1.5k/month for Zendesk. Which to have ticketing, reporting, and a helpdesk for that cost…is pretty damn good.
If this proposal is only for the creation of the Support workstream, then I’m ready to vote. I think I was over-thinking this. If I understand correctly, the next phase would then be a proposal to fund the workstream, and that’s where budget info would need to be included.
Yes. that’s my understanding as well. The main goal is to vote that a support workstream should be its own workstream with its own budget/leadership. Rather than be umbrella’d by another existing workstream.
I don’t think we even really need a vote just to create a support workstream, that can just move forward/happen IMO.
However we would need a vote to formerly appoint someone leader of that workstream and define what the workstreams’ responsibilities are, that is what the first proposal should focus on from my perspective.
Exactly, no need for a governance vote to establish this workstream, but it won’t really be “established” until a leader is appointed, which would be the next step here. The proposal to appoint the workstream leader can also include a request for funding, or funding requests could be made in a subsequent proposal too.
I’ve been thinking about this lately and want to propose setting a timeframe for workstream leaders to apply and the community to then elect the candidates (ie. August 9 - September 9, with 2 weeks to collect applications and 2 weeks to hold debates and elections). To avoid holding things back in the meantime, I think it’s fine for anyone to step up and be a de facto leader for a workstream (ie. define the workstream, make proposals to request applicable funding, and schedule public meetings where interested contributors can start to learn more about what the workstream could look like).
Just throwing out the idea, open to alternative approaches too as we figure this out together.
I like that approach - people should make proposals to define workstream responsibilities and elect initial leaders, but it’s fine for anyone to just kind of pickup and start doing things/hosting calls/moving the process forward even ahead of formerly being elected a workstream leader IMO.
BTW, thought I already commented on this but seeing now that I haven’t (must have just emoji’d it 20 times in Discord), but fully support this workstream and would gladly support you as leader, Megan, if you are planning to apply 2764
I like this idea. My goal coincidentally is have a budget proposal up in the next 2 weeks before my cross-country move. Within that I’ll be proposing myself as the work-stream leader, pending some continued research and planning.
The documentation and educational material generated from this workstream would be great for the proposal I submitted for translation! I can see a great synergy between the two workstreams – would love to see both proposals pass and get the ball rolling.