[Ideation] SCP-155: Migrate Shapeshift DAO's forum back to Discourse

Proposal Discussion
1

Summary

This proposal seeks to move our governance discussions and community forum back to Discourse (a reversal of SCP-101) due to the continued production issues and poor user experience with Metaforo.

Abstract

If approved, this proposal will enact two major changes: 1) The official forum platform of the Shapeshift DAO will be migrated back to Discourse and 2) due to the lack of support for FOX weighted voting Ideation votes will occur on Snapshot per the specification outlined in SCP-97

Motivation

Metaforo’s platform has been a constant source of governance user complaints since adoption in SCP-101. Support requests from our Moderation workstream have gone unanswered

https://www.metaforo.io/g/MetaforoOfficialDiscussionGroup/thread/odd-spot-when-banning-spammer-45106

for more than 3 months. Mobile browser issues, such as links not working, were reported to the team on Jan 3rd 2023 and are still presently an issue seven months later as of September 8th 2023.

Basic forum functionality, like the ability to quote a user, still isn’t available and currently the state of the text editor is unusable, with most contributors choosing to draft text in a separate application prior to pasting the information into Metaforo.

Shapeshift Governance passed SCP-101 in September of 2022, and the metaforo team has had an ample opportunity to retain us as users.

If passed, I will act as owner of the migration efforts to coordinate the move back to Discourse. There are some unknowns at the moment around our ability to export data from Metaforo into Discourse, but I believe we can work through them in parallel with getting this proposal kicked off. A minimum acceptable outcome would be an archive of all metaforo based discussions that is publicly available.

The DAO is facing a critical juncture in its existence and spending additional time struggling with basic communication on governance issues is a distraction that our community can easily remedy.

Specification

This proposal would kick off the following actions

A migration of our official forum platform to Discourse. The Fox Foundation is able to cover any additional costs of this migration that are unable to be absorbed by existing workstream budgets (for reference Discourse pricing available [here](https://www.discourse.org/pricing?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=google_search_geomix_brand&utm_content=Main&utm_term=discourse&matchtype=e&gad=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwjOunBhB4EiwA94JWsJggZYTKlZE0m2gaY9xJ0Gq5iaalIXn04qjPmhd3JsIVx2NtJB6poRoC46UQAvD_BwE

  1. ) and we expect the 100$/month tier to be sufficient)
  2. Modify our DNS records to point forum.shapeshift.com to the Discourse based forum
  3. If possible, resurrecting our previous Discourse build if not, creating a new Discourse build.
  4. Export of Metaforo data into a historical, publicly accessible archive. To ensure that the exported data is never tampered with we can hash the data and provide this as proof of validity on the new discourse forum.
  5. If technically possible this data will be imported into Discourse
  6. Migration of all users to Discourse and deprecation of Metaforo

Benefits

  1. Moves the Shapeshift DAO back to the de facto standard for DAO community forums. DAO participants from other communities will be familiar with our forum tooling and not encounter additional friction when interacting with an already complicated governance process.

  2. Discourse is a mature open source platform with support, documentation, on-demand data dumps and several other features that should give us more confidence that our critical conversations on governance will persist into the future.
  3. Removes user friction associated with the most basic interactions in our governance process.

Drawbacks

  1. Switching may require users to re-register.

  2. No token weighted polls available directly in discourse
  3. Historical posts from Metaforo may not be available directly on our discourse forum, but will be available in some form for reference.

Updates since original Incubation post:

Metaforo has agreed to export our data for us, but so far hasn’t been able to tell us when this would be available to us or in what format we should expect the data to be in. This means there is some uncertainty on how we will archive existing posts or potentially import back to discourse. If passed this proposal would explicitly delegate the authority to handle the technical aspects of the migration to me acting on behalf of the Fox Foundation. The community would be consulted, but no further governance steps would be required in order to make a decision on how our forum history from metaforo will be preserved. It is however a strict requirement that there will be a publicly available archive of our forum history.

2

The $100 was previous plan, we hit the max and were thinking of upgrading at the point where we switched providers, as the next jump was $300 /m (likely hit that again eventually)

I am thinking a fresh setup would be better than redoing the original. maybe we can do diff options to make the back end smoother?

3

Yes, we can definitely start fresh with discourse. I am happy to work closely with you when its set up so moderation feels comfortable with the transition.

4

I havent voted. not sure which way i want to vote. Leaving it as is, would prob be how i would lean. but im ok either way. Metaforo is easier to mod. but it only affects me, not the entire dao. i can get the mod stuff done either way :slight_smile:

5

Thanks for this info, so we should expect to eventually have that $300 monthly cost or $3,600 per year to be paid by the DAO, it also means we will likely need to get the Foundation to pay for it as I doubt they accept crypto payments. We wouldn’t be working towards more decentralization in this regard :frowning:

I’m still not in favor of moving, despite the few issues Metaforo has (some of which were fixed recently with regards to the editor and moderation) seem more like inconveniences than actual blockers that really hinder/break our governance/discussions.

If we had an alternative with similar features than Metaforo (web3 login, immutable copies of messages, in forum token polls based on SnapShot strategies, NFT gating, etc.) and a better track record in UX, I would not be against a move, but I was unable to find an alternative, and Discourse in this regard would be a big step back (they have no intention to adpot anything crypto as far as I can read their forum)… with as only gain a better UX, but worse moderation tools.

6

well, the one item for mod i asked for is impossible, i was just hoping. but they added the ip ban. course, that means i ask for something else :wink:

the $100/m (prob hold us for a few months? but near the end of using it, we were going over the limits regularly.) so im sure we would hit it eventually.

7

Appreciate you making this proposal and offering to handle the migration @0xean.

I’m still torn on this one. I agree that it’s necessary for the DAO to have a forum that works, and understand that Metaforo has had its fair share of UX issues since inception as well as ample time to fix them. On the other hand, there are few things about Metaforo that I strongly prefer over Discourse (along with using SnapShot for Ideation), including the Ideation functionality that Metaforo offers natively, the ability to sign in with a wallet and/or email, and the fact that all of the posts are stored on Arweave.

If Metaforo can address the main UX issues that we’ve been struggling with, which it seems like they either have or are will soon, I’d be in favor of sticking with them rather than migrating the forum back to Discourse and using SnapShot for Ideation. Even though some of these issues may have been reported in the past, they’ve generally been quick to fix issues that we report to them in Discord, and have been especially committed to resolving any issues we’ve reported in the past couple weeks since we let them know that patience is wearing thin and they’re at risk of losing the ShapeShift community’s support.

AFAICT, they’ve fixed the issues with the text editor, the mobile formatting issues, and the issues with quoting. Are there any other requirements we have for a forum that Metaforo isn’t fulfilling? If there are, is there any amount of time we’d be willing to wait for these issues to be addressed?

I know it’s been a year since we first migrated and can understand not wanting to wait any longer, but imo it’s worth waiting for up to a couple more weeks if the Metaforo team can commit to addressing any remaining requirements within that timeline.

8

Hi everyone! I’m not directly involved with ShapeShift so feel free to overlook this. I do product and growth, very focused on DAOs(now DAOstar and previously DeepDAO) and have spent a significant amount of time on governance forums, often Discourse. It is only recently I submitted a proposal using Metaforo, to ShapeShift.

I couldn’t help but notice how the experience felt familiar but refreshingly better than Discourse. It might be the novelty, but I think its more about the UI. It feels easier to navigate between topics and replies. There are also web3 native features that we’ve wanted for the longest time. So I would urge to everyone to consider if “moving the Shapeshift DAO back to Discourse, the de facto standard for DAO community forums” offers enough advantages to justify the onboarding.

If there was a way for ShapeShift to work together with Metaforo and get the UX fixes done asap, that might be worth trying first.

9

what other items would be needed to fix or add atm? i dont hit the blockers others have. i prefer metaforo myself. im wanting to vote… maybe we wait a bit and see how things gor for a few months more? or less if it sux

10

if im outa line lmk remove my vote etc would like larger eyes

11

thanks for speaking up. decided me to want to wait

12

Definitely not out of line to vote your conscience.

13

1 FOX = 1 Vote.

You can abstain if you want of course, but as a FOX Holder and someone who clearly believe in the our DAO’s long term success I think it’s a shame to not make your voice heard on important issues, even the ones that somewhat affect your WS.

14

Hey Guys, this is Yao from metaforo team.

I hope you’ve had the opportunity to review the recent updates we rolled out on Shapeshift’s forum a couple of days ago.

  • Recently, we have fixed quite a few issues reported by shapeshift team reported in discord channel, which include:

    fixed mobile format issues

  • add new editor to improve post experience
  • add ban ip feature required by mod team
  • improved the quote post experience
  • some other minor user experience improvements.

Currently, our ongoing work includes:

  • Adding emoji support to the markdown editor.

  • Enabling markdown editor support in comments.
  • In our planning stage, we have the following items on the agenda:

    Implementing User and Topic mentions.

  • Allowing moderators to set time frames when banning a user.
  • Forum Backup files ready for admin to download.

Please feel free to share any additional improvements or features you would like to see on our forum. Your feedback is invaluable, and we will prioritize our efforts based on your suggestions and needs. Your input helps us make the forum better for everyone.

15

thanks for sharing this perspective @amanwithwings and for this update @Yao. this has helped push me to a no vote. i would be open to supporting this proposal if we find that Metaforo cannot fulfill the community’s requirements for a forum, but from what I’ve seen they have already addressed the core issues, are continuing to improve the platform based on our feedback (including making it easier to migrate away if we decide to in the future), and provide valuable functionality such as the forum-based ideation polls that we’d lose by migrating back to Discourse. Nonetheless, thank you 0xean for making this proposal and offering to complete the migration.

16

https://snapshot.org/#/shapeshiftdao.eth/proposal/0xa60e63e21c1c8aa0370e024dbf0711fab08740043388ffb1c2437eda986d0ee2 This has moved to an official vote on snapshot

17

So is the thought is move back to a higher reoccurring monthly expense, loose web3 integration, snapshot voting, and move back to greater reliance on the foundation as an identity? If cost is equal or less it would seem that Metaforo just needs some continued attention and staying on top of the vender relationship to ensure needs are being address and met. If Metaforo is cheaper in these times of drastic calls for watching expenses why would this be a option? I haven’t seen the cost comparison so just going off comments in this post currently.

I could be wrong but I haven’t seen that much extensive use of the forum as of late so not sure if it is being put on the fact that it wasn’t working correctly or that the community just isn’t spending time using a forum as a communications tool for those not in discord everyday.

In this proposal why wouldn’t the costs associated be shared as a base starting point to simple determination, why does it come after the fact in the comments? If costs were shared during different open community calls then forgive the question but as stated I don’t believe that the whole community just resides within discord all day as a communication medium, if the DAO believes that to be so than that is a different matter. If I remember correctly the official proposal snapshot is the only immutable information source and as such should contain as much specific and direct data to why the proposal makes sense to bring forth to the community, I did see a lot of detail about mobile users in the proposal as reasoning but not much about costs, so maybe mobile users and or that connivance has some weighted considerations vs moving back toward centralization, in the needed to use the foundation going forward for identity and payment, increased monthly reoccurring costs and the loss of web3 inclusion.

18

@Neverwas - welcome back.

The proposal does mention the costs as well as two options for how this will be covered. Please see bullet #1 in the specification.

There are some unknowns with the migration and what level we will end up needing based on usage, support, etc - if the difference between paying 100 vs 300 dollars a month is material to the DAO then community members should vote this down.

Having a working forum that doesn’t cause users to abandon their posts or discourage participation is to me critical. Other’s have different priorities and can vote accordingly.

19

@0xean Thanks for the welcome and reply.

Yeah maybe I didn’t say cost comparison specifically of the two different solutions, I do see the link now for the Discourse service plans listed. Is their a difference in assumed cost from what is payed to Metaforo now?

“Having a working forum that doesn’t cause users to abandon their posts or discourage participation is to me critical. Other’s have different priorities and can vote accordingly.”

very understood, I have seen posts about this possibly resolved? Is it the case or do they persist? Obviously I haven’t been posting up to this point, just reading when I find the time and going off of the context that I saw here just today. Thanks again.

20

anytime.

Metaforo is currently free. Metaforo has been aware of these ongoing (and sometimes intermittent issues) for over a year. They are still occurring, unfortunately.

Here is a recent example - http://forum.shapeshift.com/landing?method=share&thread=scp-154-not-ready-for-prime-time-46293&refer_id=29032&post=1961164

Will it get better, maybe…