I think this is where we fundamentally disagree as my believe is that we can reach better outcomes if we reinforce most of the WGs currently existing instead of working ‘in our own ways’. As such there is strong synergy within the DAO, little or nothing is overlapping and in fact whatever we do syncs well for the good of all. With draft proposal being currently debated on how to facilitate and approve new WGs, one of my suggestion in the ongoing debate is for there to be a process in the preliminary stages of approval where except a problem a new WG is trying to solve is NOVEL, there should be consideration made for the group and its ideas to be redirected to another existing group addressing similar issues and then part of the budget required to address the problem they want to solve is redirected to the existing group that’s directly or indirectly dealing with it, they deliver on their promises and the WG they are sign posted to ensure they have hit their targets and then pay them. This just reduce the need for a lot of WGs except those that are solving some novel ideas that haven’t been addressed yet.
Not sure if you have been following the recent proposal draft by @CWG posted by @Slorg to create a framework to set WGs going forward. It’s been an interesting debate so far. Please see below and follow up if you can. A lot of points people raised while debating your WG proposal are being suggested to be considered for final approval of that draft proposal.