In the five years that I've been on the network no proposal this significant has been publicly brought before the Senate. This proposal has taken over every public group, every Urbit-related twitter space and blog. Prodigal and exiled individuals have been filtering back into the network to gather information, opine, and show support. The future of the Urbit Foundation is the only thing on the mind of anyone who cares about Urbit.
Situations like this are exactly what governance models are created to navigate and Urbit's governance comes down to the Senate. If the Senate can't marshal a quorum to address this situation then it is not fit for purpose. It will call into question the leadership of the Urbit Foundation, the value of the Foundation itself, and the worthiness of the Senate to wield the power invested in it. Regardless of whether they ratify my preferred outcome, this proposal demands that the governance model of the project be actively applied and provide a clear direction.
I support the proposal to replace the current Urbit Foundation board and Executive Director. As a result of their actions over the past year I have zero confidence in their ability to make progress toward realizing the promise of Urbit. Their managerial floundering is well documented. It seems there is a new, half-baked technical vision every month, the latest of which is a chat app, which Urbit has had for more than half a decade.
Technical proposals aren’t really being decided by this vote, but the ability to present a coherent technical plan should be presented by anyone who hopes to set project direction. The coalition proposing to replace the current leadership has released a demo and will likely release a roadmap soon. The current leadership has presented comically vague, spoken proposals with impossible timelines. They have released nothing that I would consider a serious plan and there's no indication that they plan to.
The newly proposed leadership team is actively involved. Each member has a proven record of moving the project forward and, together, they have a meaningfully non-zero chance of recovering the Urbit Foundation. A non-zero chance of success beats a zero chance, even on Mars.
I don't represent a galaxy and am in no position to make demands of the coalition forming to replace the UF leadership. Nonetheless, here are some things that I think would help sway potential fence-sitters.
A detailed technical roadmap including estimated development costs in both time and money. The demos we've seen to date have been promising, but it would increase confidence to have a detailed project specification. Endorsements from Tlon and core devs about the feasibility of the proposal would be excellent.
A release schedule with hard success metrics and up-front consequences for failure. The new board should hold their Director to clear deliverables and have a plan to change course if things begin to go off the rails again. It's not a fun document to compose, but people will be more willing to support a plan with an escape hatch.
A letter from each of the proposed board members outlining their guiding principles, intentions, and plans for the Urbit Foundation.
A public communications strategy that includes monthly progress updates, board meeting minutes, etc.
A town hall session to review most of these publications and take questions.
The Urbit operating system and network are not at risk from the current challenges. However, the governance model and purpose of the address hierarchy are. There is no place for a governing class that can't engage to address the most pressing leadership crisis in the project's history. I hope for my preferred outcome, but failure to reach quorum will result in fundamental changes to the project for the worse. If you represent a vote in the Senate it is critical that you exercise your power, one way or another.
~nisfeb ⚓🐬