[Incubation] Renewing the Operations Workstream for a 4th Term (February-July)


This proposal is for a continuation of budget funding for another 6 month term, February 1-July 31st, 2023 (Fourth Term) for the current Operations workstream that was established with continual renewal of the passings: [SCP-8], [SCP-59], and [SCP-94].


The Operations workstream is an integral part of the growth and development of healthy systems for reliably producing and maintaining the ShapeShift product suite and its uptime, responsiveness and feature functionality. The workstream additionally provides similar support and structure to the DAO, its ecosystem and networks.

Through Production Issue Procedure Best Practices, Triage and Bounty Management, Deployment and Regression Testing, and DAO Admin Procedures and Practices, the ShapeShift DAO Operations Workstream provides essential resources and tools for efficiency, organization, and overall product and services health that are vital to the success of the DAO, the product suite, it’s contributors, and $FOX token utility.


Renewing this workstream will allow Operations to continue to work side by side with other workstreams to increase efficiency in individual procedural processes across the DAO and help progress deployment and testing processes while still verifying and maintaining reliability, health, and full functionality of all provided services. New practices developed to expedite efficiency through collaboration and administration of procedures over the last term include newly developed responsibilities such as: Marketing content reviews, RDP disclosure management, Partnership flow creation and maintenance, Gitbook documentation management, and full coverage of customer support, among others.

These procedures and collaborations allow the Engineering workstream to spend more time building and deploying; the Product workstream to spend more time scoping, designing, and implementing; the C-Mods more C-Mod time, etc… Funding this workstream empowers Operations to continue to complete the above stated goals through our continually developing practices, and organize and provide updates, resources, communication, coordination, documentation and any other needs that may arise from other workstreams, the DAO Community and its processes.

The Operations workstream is the only workstream focused on the wider picture of the product suite’s uptime, functionality, and overall health. It additionally mirrors that responsibility in the DAO Discord, Github, and Notion by synergizing and coordinating cross-stream collaboration further strengthening the DAO.


The Operations workstream Notion repo can be found here.

Operations maintains:

Triage tracker and Triage Report Tracker

The ShapeShift Dework Bounties Board, Trusted Community Dev timesheets, Bug Bounty Tracker

2022 Prod Issues, Release Stats and testing fees, Regression Testing Schedule

Ops Review in the Content Production Roadmap

Ops Sprint, Governance Call, AllFox, Go/NoGos, Retros

RDP program, Gitbook, Customer support in Discord

The Operations Workstream strives to keep the greater DAO agile and committed to maximizing efficiency, scalability, and transparency with a strategic lean into data-based decision making. At times, best practices and procedures may be challenged, modified, updated, changed, archived or revisited to maintain those objectives. (See: Unsolved User Problems, the governance tracker, POAP minting, daily regression testing, the evolution of goat/no goats, etc)

The renewal term length for this workstream and its contributors is 6 months, from February 1st 2023 to July 31st 2023.

This proposal continues @Tyler | ShapeShift as the workstream leader and @Tshifty, @Ron/PTT, @MBMaria, and @wesleygraves as Operations Assistants.

Budget ask: $262,500 - 20.45% less than the last term

Monthly USDC: $32,425 - 17.5% reduction from $39,275.00 last term.

Monthly FOX: $11,325 - 28% reduction from $15,725.00 last term.

Monthly total budget: $43,750.00 - 20.45% reduction from $55,000 last term.

6 month USDC budget: $194,550

6 month FOX budget: $67,950

6 month Total budget: $262,500

Full budget details

A few changes have been made from the previous term in this next proposal with regards to staffing and budget reductions. As the bear market and DAO buidling march forward, the overall demand of Operational administration and testing requirements has evolved and reduced. Regression tests have gone from daily to a monthly rotation. Deployment test procedures have reduced the amount of time and contributors needed to efficiently respond to deployment testing requirements. The bounty program has been chilled until further strategic conversations can redirect it to a more successful and efficient workflow. Operations bases its focus on efficiency and in the spirit of optimization, it has archived and reduced cross workstream dependency on procedures and meetings like goat/no goats and Unsolved User Problems.

Across the board, these optimizations have pressed hard against the need for the complete staffing proposed and fulfilled in the previous term as months progressed and the DAO shrunk and refined. Even the inclusion of all customer support responsibilities did not move the needle away from the clear sign that the Operations workstream should not be exempt from the hard staffing decisions that had been made in every other workstream to this point.

Contributors @Neverwas, and @lych have both made quality contributions to the DAO over their tenure with the DAO Operations Workstream. They have been given 1 month severance, sent from Operations excess budget in Colony to help with this transition. Each contributor was informed of this decision in early January and was additionally paid for the rest of the month without expectation of any further responsibilities to the workstream.

Tyler and the current Operations Workstream are confident that the goals and responsibilities of the workstream can be proficiently maintained with a smaller and more focused team.

The budget for testing funds has been reduced $2,500 USDC this term to match testing requirements.

Tyler’s Workstream Leader salary has been adjusted from $12,500/month to 15,000/month and the % FOX has also been reduced in the WS leader salary from 40% to 15% this term.This adjustment aligns the WS leader salary with the lowest paid full time Product Workstream contributor passed in proposal [SCP-119] This workstream salary has not seen any changes or increase in the previous 14 months of service, while Tyler’s contributions and responsibilities have greatly increased. Tyler forwent any salary adjustments last term to assure the pay raises given to all other Operations contributors then.

Operations accounted for 11% of the total monthly DAO spend in the last proposal. The DAO is lighter by a number of Workstreams this term so the potential % of the total DAO monthly spend for this term’s budget is 16%.

If network conditions or the price of FOX decreasing dramatically alters or changes Operations ability to perform required deployment and regression testing, an additional proposal addendum for test funds may be proposed.

Specific Goals and Success Metrics

The goals and success metrics for the Operations Workstream are listed below, split into current Goals and KPIs.

Current Measurables:

Production Issue Best Practices


To minimize downtime of the entire product suite.

To resolve production environment bugs efficiently with minimal disruption to engineering processes, deployment cadences, or user experience.


99% uptime of the product suite and services:

July: 99.66%

August: 100%

September 96.6%

October: 93.2%

November: 99.8%

December: 98.7%

Average 6 month uptime: 97.9%

<8 Production Issue Escalations per Quarter - 6 Escalations in Q4, 2 Escalations in Q3

<50 Total Combined DAO Contributor hours dedicated to Production Issue Resolutions Per Quarter (Q3 - 24.5, Q4 - 23 hours)

Triage Management


To discover, isolate, navigate, and manage resolutions of user facing issues in all ShapeShift products and services.

To provide known troubleshooting and mitigation steps for issue reporters and users during the discovery and recreation of triage tickets.

To mitigate and expedite time required from core contributors spent on bug tickets, issue reports, and production level emergencies.

To transfer correctly completed and accurate Github tickets of triage bugs to Engineering or Product to be posted for bounty.


Greater than 80% resolution rate goal: 66% resolution rate this year.

This goal was not hit this term as many of the admining and oversight cycles spent on ticket flow management was refined to direct github ticket writing and the loss of the unsolved user problems ticket clean up workflow. This process will be updated and optimized this term as the workflow from support issues to ticket generation/monitoring are now all in one process. This KPI will be updated with the new flow and communicated accordingly in future AllFoxes.

Deployment and Regression Testing


To catch 95% of prod issues during the deployment testing process.

To catch user facing issues in production environments in regression tests and #triage them accordingly.

A deployment test is completed by the Operations Workstream during each release process and upon request in pre-deployment branch testing.

Specific regression tests are performed once a day by an Operations Workstream contributor to complete a full monthly regression testing schedule in accordance with regression testing best practices.

Operations prioritize blocking bugs, supporting engineers, and efficiency in the processes already in place over chasing non-blocking bugs for a ‘perfected’ release.

In the 120 releases created in the newest iteration of the deployment testing process since September, 8 total prod issues were experienced with only 3 of them being caused by bugs that could have been caught in the deployment testing process. 3 bugs in 130 releases = 97.5% This does not include the releases from the earlier version of testing procedures.


<2 Cadences missed per quarter due to bugs overlooked in Ops Testing (0 cadence missed last term)

<2 Rollbacks during releases per quarter due to bugs overlooked in Ops Testing (0 Rollbacks occurred last term)

DAO Admin Procedures and Practices


To organize successful DAO meetings related to Goat/No Goat, Retros, Ops Sprints, and AllFoxes.

To track, organize, record, and optimize DAO repos keeping them current and relevant. To help in cross workstream collaboration projects that optimize efficiency and collaborative, transparent communication.

To provide assistance in projects that require support in generating procedures to be completed for the DAO or other workstreams.


72 hour max response time for all PR review requests from Marketing in the Content Production Roadmap.

Keep All Workstream leaders and key contributors informed and involved in contributions to all Ops Sprints, Governance Calls, AllFoxes Slide decks, Go/No Gos, and Retros.

This goal was hit, however the process has matured and does not need the same level of focus in this next term.


If this proposal passes, the DAO will continue to fund the Operations workstream budget to meet the deliverables and services outlined which are integral to the DAO’s success and current practices. Coverage for Prod Issue escalations, Triage Management, Regularly scheduled regression and deployment testing, Cross workstream alignment and stakeholder resources would all be focused, maintained and improved upon by the workstream.

Passing this proposal will continue uninterrupted support and services offered from the Operations workstream to the DAO.


Funding this workstream costs the DAO stablecoins and FOX during the duration of the proposed term. This workstream would cost the DAO treasury potentially $262,500 over 6 months (~$43,750/month) if all funds are needed and exhausted in the budget.


For: You support funding the Operations Workstream’s anticipated budget for 6 months, totaling a potential $262,500 to the DAO, and continuing the roles, responsibilities, and expectations outlined above in the Operations Workstream during that time.

Against: You do not support continuing to fund the Operations Workstream.

Hi @TylerShapeShift, thanks for putting this together, your team has been doing a great job and I really appreciate you all keeping the boat afloat during these turbulent times.

I see you cut a few positions for the new period due to the overall demand of the work-stream functions. I understand your reasons for the WS-leader salary adjustment, however, should this reduction in overall demands be taken into account for the WS-leader salary adjustment as well?

Hi @Bufficorn4949, I appreciate your feedback and kind words about the great job the workstream has been doing so far!

The increase in salary for the Workstream Leader is in alignment with the continual amount of responsibilities required and expected in the role. Although some of the roles and tasks fulfilled by Operations Assistants have been optimized away, the tasks for the Workstream leader have here have not.

A view to some additional Workstream Leader responsibilities that have been added to my plate since the last term that were passed via governance:





While some of these proposals have tasks that can be delegated to Operations Assistants, a lot do not. All of those tasks have required additional leadership responsibilities above and beyond what was outlined in the last term and are now new expected responsibilities alongside the old.

I have forgone salary adjustments in the last term to assure promotions for the rest of the workstream and have been working harder with each new responsibility. I have also proven continual leadership capability and dedication above and beyond normal contributions with the recent interim Workstream role in Marketing and extremely successful and quick turnaround there.

If basing the salary off of the average Operations Director salary from: https://www.salary.com/research/salary/benchmark/operations-director-salary the previous salary held for the last 14 months ranks below the bottom 10% of average salaries. This adjustment brings it to still slightly lower than the median average salary for an Operations Director in the United States. I have been paid below market value for a long time and this adjustment is not an embellishment or extreme request in compensation for value added.

In response to your reply to @Bufficorn4949 @TylerShapeShift you stated

and listed governance proposals, I would ask that you could explain that further


As it relates to Support possible new tasks for the WorkStream leader.


As these are third party accounts how many on this list are currently delegated to operations and what type of task. Is this budgetary expense item, is it administration of account standing (seats, renewals)? How frequently are these tasks needed?


As this has yet to be implemented, is it in anticipation of a task or are you already doing this?


As a third party service providing data, how does this impact the operations leadership role? As a responsibility are you making these security determinations or is this deferred to other community members that you pass it along to? Are you the one interfacing with the Hackenproof team on a regular basis?

“I have forgone salary adjustments in the last term to assure promotions for the rest of the workstream and have been working harder with each new responsibility.”

I believe that the compensation increase for the workstream members happened in the second term, not the third, when the challenge of budgetary cuts was introduced.

TLDR 2 guys cut + Tyler gets a payrise, in a bear market, with 11mo runway.

Save & add value Vs. spend & extract value. It’s a bear market, some people lost jobs and you’re complaining you haven’t had a pay rise in a year?


Ps. Your spreadsheets should accurately describe the roles of people. Eg. “Ops assistant” is vague and doesn’t tell me what these people are doing specifically. If it’s not immediately obvious by their role how they’re contributing to achieving the shapeshift vision/objectives then they are clearly not needed.

Hi @Neverwas,

The intention of listing those governance posts was as physical evidence to increases in responsibilities that have been passed via governance since the last Operations renewal proposal that were out of scope of those terms.

I’ll admit your post(s) have felt more based more in emotional responses questioning my leadership skills or a vague accusation that these tasks could or should be completed without leadership which seems a little pointed with your previous closeness to a lot of these projects. However, here are some Leadership responsibilities that exist and have been added for each proposal you have asked for detail on

IDEATION - SCP 117 - Realign Support responsibilities under the Operations Workstream

-Create, maintain, and continually encourage optimizations around providing support in Discord through collaboration with the Giantkin and the mods. This is everything from: Macro-level ticket flow management, issue management, staffing management, historical, technical, and product knowledge base and management of information sharing within team comms and ticket comms, support etiquette management, agile based optimizations of workflows and reporting management, feature request management and communications, optimizations for alternative language support, outage notification design, mantainece and management.

-Access and admin of Zendesk tickets - I am solely responsible for all migration of new Zendesk tickets to discord until all Zendesk links have been updated across our platform as well as the shut down and depreciation of the service before the end of the month.

-Management over the creation, deployment, maintenance and workflow of Gitbook article generation. This one was previously delegated to you @Neverwas with support from myself and the rest of the Operations workstream. It is now being finished by myself and the rest of the team with collaboration and active communication with the Engineering workstream.

-Redesigning of the Triage and Unsolved User Problems with the complete flow for support now under Operations for the first time at the DAO. Operations now owns the workflow of Support > Triage > Github ticket creation > Development testing > Deployment Testing > Communication with Support. This process needs to both continue to function for all of the processes involved individually and be optimized for a more streamlined experience in the future.

-Ticket communication with users. - I often am able to come in as second level triage support (and regularly do) to help resolve issues inside individual tickets on an ad-hoc need-be basis.

[SCP-113] Handover of account ownership and administration to the DAO

Listed directly in the section entitled “Drawbacks” from the passed proposal:

‘Additional administrative burden on trusted workstream leaders and multisig signers’

-Myself and a few other Workstream leaders have begun this process. The permissions and responsibilities around protecting account access being given to the Workstream Leaders as outlined in the proposal are of high importance to the success of the decentralization of the DAO. The process for getting these permissions is not a simple one time call or email and initially will continue to take time from all Workstream leaders until the transfer of all permissions is complete.

Your question about delegation of Operational tasks is a misunderstanding of the responsibility delegated to the DAO with the sharing of these permissions. If looking back to the unfortunate circumstances of the DAO missing the SAFE claim that was passed in SCP-120, and the dilemma of properly managing and incentivizing treasury signers: https://snapshot.org/#/shapeshiftdao.eth/proposal/0x8758fd4525535ed22442557564850cefd5b929307de6d96a0c3f13967b2627a6



This proposal passed in governance, but the actions to execute were not performed in time by signers for us to be able to claim our SAFE. We can clearly see the consequence of delegating DAO permissions without proper compensation to motivate them for the responsibilities bestowed. These permissions are for root access to many of the key accounts responsible for the general operations of our stack and success as a DAO.

The question of how often these credentials are needed to be accessed/updated is not nearly as consequential as their safekeeping and proper management.

[SCP-107] Grant Ops Workstream authority to Appoint/Remove Push Delegates

Similar to the above proposal, this is a permission responsibility that has been delegated specifically to me as the Operations Workstream Leader. I have needed to use these permissions to request additions and will need to in the future.

[SCP-104] Outsource the DAO’s Responsible Disclosure Program to HackenProof

-@Neverwas, This was a task delegated to you and it is no longer. I was the manager in the creation of the process, expectations, and workflow. This was a task that was delegated to you and was very slow to be prioritized and you would not take action to continue communication of these tasks without my continued direct management and communication and check ins. This task has seen extreme improvements in its process and timelines of issue communication and resolution since it has been taken back by myself is to be re-delegated out to more capable members of the team continuing on. See for yourself in the same day turnaround of RDP FOX-31 in #Engineering-public: https://discord.com/channels/554694662431178782/1062422396629422090/1062422435242180730

“I believe that the compensation increase for the workstream members happened in the second term, not the third, when the challenge of budgetary cuts was introduced.”


You can see from the ‘Full Budget Details’ that the previous term was at the old rate and the new rate was officially ratified via the passing of this proposal. The promotions were indeed provided mid way through the second term and then communicated and passed via governance in term 3.

My rate has been consistent (and far below average) since I stepped up from an Operations Coordinator to propose to become the first Operations Workstream Leader here. I intentionally came in with a lower salary and the spirit of proving and earning any future compensation at a later date. I believe my track record within the DAO (both in Operations and with my stint in Marketing) have greatly shown my value, passion, and leadership skills that prove the adjustment of compensation in this fourth term is not only very deserving, but still a modest and appropriate ask, even in this time of careful budgeting in the shadow of the bear.

“TLDR 2 guys cut + Tyler gets a payrise, in a bear market, with 11mo runway.”

I would hope that someone actively participating in a governance process of the token would take the time to read the proposals as they are important, detailed, and nuanced at times.

I’m also not sure when you started following the DAO but at our current 11 months of runway, we are positioned to last longer than any of our previous projected runways since this bear began. This proposal has the Operations Workstream budget see an additional 20% decrease in its ask across the board and helps increase that runway while still providing a crew that can help the DAO succeed.

“Save & add value Vs. spend & extract value. It’s a bear market, some people lost jobs and you’re complaining you haven’t had a pay rise in a year?”

I’m not sure where you saw any complaints, yes, there is an ask for a compensation adjustment in this proposal along with pretty substantial evidence proving my worth, accomplishments, and continual responsibilities to the DAO. This proposal reduces the spend (so saving, not spending) and frankly adds value with the reduction of staff size and increased cycles that will be able to be achieved by the team with less distraction.

“Ps. Your spreadsheets should accurately describe the roles of people. Eg. “Ops assistant” is vague and doesn’t tell me what these people are doing specifically. If it’s not immediately obvious by their role how they’re contributing to achieving the shapeshift vision/objectives then they are clearly not needed.”

That is a fair callout about specific responsibilities of the Operations Assistants. There is some documentation in our notion that outlines a large portion of the Operations Assistants tasks, roles, and responsibilities that is linked in the proposal and can be freely navigated to better understand the job requirements.

I saw via another post that due to an altercation/misunderstanding around communications of the airdrop that included verbiage about pump and dumps, you now refuse to engage with the Discord. I’d like to firstly clarify that the Moderation team’s entire workstream budget is the $11k you seem disgruntled about, not one individual. Additionally this DAO operates all of its main functions and communication through Discord. The layers of depth to our permissions and roles are 1st class in the DAO ecosystem and the Moderation of them is no simple feat. The amount of praise and respect that is given to that team from workstream members and contributors alike for the hard work and hours, and flexibility provided done for the small compensation approved. If you continue to be a meaningful voice in the DAO, I would implore you to consider your own actions in the circumstance and potentially reconsider your ultimatum as the Discord is the best place to be engaged and become involved in any level outside of this forum and Governance process.

If you were to be in the Discord, no doubt you would firsthand experience the work and imprint an Operations Assistant has on the DAO’s daily operations. Customer Support, Triage, Deployment testing, regression testing, meeting organization, data collection, Article review and Q/A, administration of the bounty program, The RDP, partnership flow, DAO tooling optimization, and cross workstream collaboration on projects, tasks, and campaigns of any and all kinds are all expectations of an Operations Assistant. Working in Web 3 and assuring reliability, uptime, velocity of development, maintenance priorities, and clear communication of project and ticket management is routine for an Operations Assistant and being a accommodating to reassess and continually meet the needs of the DAO is a job that comes in the form of different roles at different times.

Many of the Operations Assistants are extremely proficient in a number of the above listed tasks and in some cases have become specialists for the DAO with their roles in doing so. Outside of their specialties, Operations offers support coverage from 9am to 8pm MST Mon-Fri with this small crew of multi-taskers.

I will work with the team to update some more specific job descriptions for what roles they specifically do and get them added to out notion asap, but our notion is probably the best place to get details about what the Operations Assistants do if you aren’t interesting in reconsidering your stance on joining the place where all of the operations, meetings, and collaborations for this DAO take place.


Thank you for the more detailed response verse the pervious very vague links response. As a community we have to remember that not everyone is versed in the daily activities of contributors and making determined decisions for voting purposes should have the data to support such things.

I can only hope that it proves useful to those looking to make informed decisions on these longer term DAO investments in both resource and capability.

I will let others garner what they may from your answers, but you did choose to directly call me out and make a perviously undisclosed to me, statement toward my performance, so I will reply to that. [SCP-104] Outsource the DAO’s Responsible Disclosure Program to HackenProof.

The creation of the process and workflow, what was expressed to me. I interface with the third party either though a portal or communication channels receiving the data(reports) pass those along to you.You then take that information to internal contributors to get a response, additional information and or a plan of action, Which is then generally relayed back to me, which I then respond to the third party.

“This task has seen extreme improvements in its process and timelines of issue communication and resolution since it has been taken back by myself is to be re-delegated out to more capable members of the team continuing on.”

You posted it and asked the same people that you always did, this time you used engineering public thread verse your normal means of communicating with them in 1on1’s, leadership, DM’s I don’t know I never saw it publicly to be able to follow up on or push forward. It was given to you on the 5th you let me go the 6th it was posted on the 10th. The reports came in over the holiday’s when no one was around, and the first day back, I told you what I recommended for two of them and responded accordingly closing them out.

In countless 1on1’s you never once requested a change in process or offered any critique, this is a new revelation, that I was the problem within the work flow or that I wasn’t capable. Maybe I was under the incorrect assumption that these one on ones were around feedback, syncing, and resolving issues? I can recall even you yourself questioning the fact that you were being the roadblock in the process.

My perspective on Tyler’s leadership and why I support this proposal as written:

Last fall, the marketing workstream was facing an uncertain future in the DAO. After Lindsay’s interim tenure, it was unclear how the leadership position would be filled, and Tyler stepped into the breach. While keeping every Ops plate in the air, he simultaneously facilitated a re-energizing of our team by allowing us to focus on alignment, process, and creativity. His compensation during that time was dubious at best; allocated 100% in FOX effectively locked for an extended period of time while price declined. In short, the DAO is indebted to Tyler not only for his double-duty last fall, but the extraordinary skill and effort he continues to display day in/day out - any project in our industry would fight to keep his kind of talent.

It’s always painful when personnel cuts are made, and radical transparency comes with unique tradeoffs. However, in my opinion this proposal serves the best interest of the DAO, both in terms of talent retention and budgetary concerns.

Budget line or funds for severance that was provided?

I was wondering where the funds for the stated severance payments were. I didn’t see it in the renewal budget, I would assume that was left over funds from the 3rd term?

Some small overlooks just to point out, I am used to being an editor set of eyes. I know that this is just incubation so edits aren’t an issue.

  1. Discrepancies in job titles from the first tab and second
  2. Several of the Calculations on the lower part of summary tab are missing
  3. The period of time for the monthly breakdown displays the wrong months
  4. The third tab, not sure of its purpose or intent.

Thanks for the editor set of eyes, the spreadsheet has been updated. The severance pay was taken out of unused funds in Colony from the previous term and have no bearing or determination on the budget of this proposal.

I’m going to agree with @TWells here as I have witnessed @TylerShapeShift’s leadership skills first-hand when he was the interim leader of the Marketing Workstream. He provided the direction and support we needed and gave us the freedom to explore and carry out various strategies we were unable to before.

As for the pay rise, the overall budget has been reduced by 20% so really, I think the pay rise is warranted, taking into account the fact that he has been the lowest-paid leader for a long time, a leader of two Workstreams (not many would agree to such responsibility) and most importantly, he has shown and proven his value to the DAO.