RPIP Editor Resignation

Hello everyone,

As of today, I’m stepping away from being an RPIP editor. Please see my final statement, submitted as an RPIP here.

It’s been an honor! Thanks to the other editors for their continued service.


So I don’t know the internal politics of the editor group, and haven’t seen responses from other editors, but on the face of it this is bad news. The pDAO members don’t have nearly enough technical knowledge to decide on whether a smart contract change is safe/efficient/needed/critical; in this case we have an extremely high degree of trust in the editors to help us decide, and for now the team/auditors to backstop us (although that is intended to be temporary). I would think it’s generally safer to have editors with many divergent opinions rather than a group that is philosophically unified, as doing nothing is usually safer than doing things quickly.

As you were eluding to in your resignation, do you feel Rocket Pool would be better with a dual RPIP pathway: a slow inward-facing ‘code is law’ smart contract/tokenomics process, and a quick-and-dirty outward facing social layer/political/bylaw/signaling process that would be more adaptable to the current whims of the pDAO? Potentially with different editors given the different needs?

1 Like