Working efficient and improving costs is good.
Tighten spending – ok!
But to me this looks like finding a scapegoat.
The question is, what could have you, we contribute to help to make Shutter a success/progress? Including me, who has done nothing for the last 12 months.
If this proposal goes through, there is little trust in the entire DAO and the service providers. If you want to finger point to a scapegoat, we all would have failed.
1. We Already Have Transparency
The work is open-source, monthly reports are provided, AMA, and now office hours are open for anyone to ask questions. If someone wants to know how funds are being used or check progress, they already can. Adding another layer of audits feels unnecessary and redundant.
Checkout:
Reports:
In none of the reports except the first time 20 days ago by the author of this proposal (Brainbot Update for January 2025 - #2 by Ricosworksa) there were comments or concerns about the reports/numbers and activities.
The ultimate goal of shutter/brainbot is to accrue value to its token - for the community - So that the whole system can work. So far, it has been a fiasco, far worse than the rest of the market (for those who like to compare), although there were mostly insider in the shutter token. This is clear, and will need to be scrutinised. It’s a real shame to see shutter’s value being destroyed like that. It has to stop.
That’s a great idea but how can the DAO/Shutter achieve it? What can we do and execute to achieve token value?
The expectations are for the review/audit exactly what?
What would the DAO or it’s member benefit of additional insights?
What “detailed” report do we need?
IMHO, the only insight we might have is to cutting cost here and there. Ok, but what other insights are we going to have to “spotlight success and growth”)?
As someone who’s seen how software projects succeed (and fail), it’s clear that agile development isn’t just a method—it’s a necessity, especially in complex areas like L1/L2 and privacy protocols. The core idea is simple: build, test, learn, and adapt. And that’s exactly what Brainbot has been doing.
But here’s the thing—agile isn’t about hitting every milestone perfectly on the first try. It’s about iterating based on feedback. It’s about open conversations when things get stuck, which is already happening through reports, office hours, and community discussions.
The history of tech is full of examples where teams slowed down because they were forced into rigid processes or audits instead of focusing on building. The DAO’s strength is its flexibility, its openness, and its ability to adapt quickly. That’s what we should protect.
If there’s frustration about progress or outcomes, that’s fair. But the solution isn’t to throw more processes at it—it’s to tighten the feedback loops we already have. More direct conversations. Clearer goals. And a focus on outcomes that actually matter.
The reality is, development is messy. Progress isn’t always linear. But the best results come when teams feel trusted to build, knowing that the community is there for support, not for more paperwork.
Let’s stay focused on that. Let’s build, learn, and adapt—together.
2. Pausing Payments is Risky
Halting payments and grants could seriously disrupt ongoing work. We risk losing momentum, damaging relationships, and delaying progress—especially when the crypto space is already competitive. The focus should be on moving forward, not slowing down.
3. The Cost is Hard to Justify
Spending nearly $30,000 on an audit when the treasury runway is tight doesn’t make sense. That money could go into actual development or BD efforts instead of paying for a report that tells us what we already know.
You can write a small piece of software that can monitor github repos, X/twitter time line to get something like this (https://x.com/i/grok/share/4J12ysbN4u1cX5hpMNwRHQ8fm) . For the financial spending, the only way to justify this is to compare the spendings with a similar project with similar team size and complexity. Breaking the cost down won’t help anyone. Important is to understand how the development process is (CI, automation, testing, etc.) where improvements can be made to increase the speed of delivery but keeping quality.
4. It Sends the Wrong Message
We trust Brainbot enough to fund their work, involve them in discussions, and rely on their updates. Pushing for a formal audit implies we don’t trust them, which could hurt morale and create unnecessary friction.
5. It’s Overly Bureaucratic
This is a DAO, not a corporation. We’re built on community, transparency, and trust. Adding more processes and paperwork slows us down (need more coordination) and moves us away from our cooperative values.
6. There Are Better Alternatives
If there are real concerns, let’s fix it in simpler ways:
• Improve the monthly reports with more specifics on milestones and spending as suggested.
• Host frequent community sessions to ask deeper questions.
• Set up a simple treasury dashboard so everyone can track spending in real-time.
• Review big grants as a community without needing a full audit.