Iām a strong supporter of better defining āpaid operatorsā for the DAO and ensuring tighter scoping of responsibilities and accountability. One thing to note before I forget is they probably shouldnāt be employeeās, but independent services providers for the DAO. Might be worth updating language if this proposal goes ahead.
Quote a lot to unpack hereā¦
First question, how do you see this playing with [DRAFT 2] Rewarding Contributions in $CODE?
In its current form it seems to supersede this proposal and its not clear to me how theyād co-exist smoothly. Will try and bullet point concerns here:
- Can these roles be performed but one person or shared out?
- Given @Colin4ward comment in the recent initiative lead meeting regarding $CODE rewards being a non-starter in their eyes and needing to calculate in USD, does that mean weāre going to have $5-10k USD for one person to āleadā the team whilst everyone is also paid in USD equivalent?
- How will this affect incentives, motivations and rewards for contributing for other ānon-paidā members? Theyāll be doing a lot of work but getting a fraction of the rewards no?
- What role do these people have in their perspective guild budget applications? Are you proposing we elect these roles completely independently of the Budget Application process defined in [DRAFT 2] Rewarding Contributions in $CODE. And if so, how do you see that working? How are people going to create budgets when they donāt know who the lead that will primarily responsible for these KPIs is going to be?
- More broadly, this proposal is allocating responsibility and KPIs to groups so it feels like regardless of that role the lead plays in defining budgets ala the last question these budgets canāt really be made until this proposal is formalised. This seems like it could add huge delays to starting season 1.
It seems we have lots of competing approaches trying to address the challenges, I wonder how we can bring them together. My plan this week was the focus entirely on supporting teams to generate their budgets, but with all these unanswered questions not entirely clear to me how weāre doing this now.
My intention was for the budget proposal to define much of what is being defined here.
Maybe a synchronous could would be wise.?
How are Core Operators paid?
Their salary will be a base of USD amount, with $CODE incentives depending on achievement of KPIs. This proposal recommends valuing the positions in USD and then replacing 30% of that with $CODE equivalent.
Am i understanding this correctly whereby if X āpaid operatorā is rewarding $10,000, $3,000 of that will be providing in $CODE at market rate? If thatās the case, when does this proposal suggest that rate is decidedā¦ each month? start of the Season? End of the Season?
Furthermore, given the $CODE token could see significant market volatility, have you put any thought yet to the impact this may have on the treasury balance? A lot of $CODE is potentially being allocated here without any clarity on the impact it will have on available $CODE. We donāt want $CODE going to 0 quickly, right?
Initial Core Operator Roles
Coordination Ops
Accountable for overall organizational process excellence, building internal coordination between guilds and projects.
Tasks to deliver for Season 1:
- Improve internal coordination and champion process improvements accordingly.
- Establish monthly cadence for town halls and DAO coordination meetings.
- Envisioning, definition and creation of Operations Guild for S1.
- Deliver plans to increase and encourage decentralization efforts in S2.
KPIs:
- Complete and maintain the legal background for Foundation.
- Complete and maintain the legal background for revenue-generating projects.
- Create an internal database of the membership.
Rewards:
- $8,000 monthly dollars, for one season.
Iāve got initial thoughts on an Operations Guild Budget here. At a very highly level itās infrastructure, finance/legal/budget processes, DAO wide coordination. There is a lot of overlap which is nice to see but it seems like
It seems youāve opted for allocating finance to the Governance Guild so would be good to understand why youāre advocating for that and if youāve got any thoughts on what that might entail?
Why not a treasury guild that stands alone?
Community Guild Lead
Accountable for the overall engagement of members of the DAO.
Tasks to deliver for Season 1:
- Establish minimum viable contribution model for $CODE eligibility
- Deliver documented onboarding process & KPI for measuring itās success
- Deliver plans to increase and encourage the diversity of the membership and leadership of the DAO in S2.
KPIs:
- Onboard 350 new members (>3/day)
- 100 documented minimum viable contributions
Like the goals here.
MBD Guild Lead
Accountable for increasing revenue with external relationships.
Tasks to deliver for Season 1:
- Develop a partnership pipeline with qualifying factors for paid and unpaid partnerships.
- Deliver S2 sponsorship package at end of S1
- Request for financial support template that enables initiatives to request funding solicitations
KPIs:
- $50k/month in S1 sponsorship
- 95% fulfillment on sponsorship obligations
Temporality and Rewards:
- $5,000 monthly dollars, for one season.
Seem like sensible tasks. The target for $50k sponsorship in Season 1 seems low though considering all the costs included in this proposal and then, as mentioned above, the thoughts on the last initiative leads call regarding $CODE rewards being a non-starter. If we only hit that number they I worry no one is going to be paid close to the amounts being suggested here.
I will update the financial model for the DAO with a scenario that includes these figures and see what weāre left with
Gov and Treasury Guild Lead
Accountable for managing the strategy for $CODE
Tasks to deliver in Season 1:
- Develop a comprehensive treasury strategy, with a proposed $CODE burn rate, buyback schedule, and optional mint rate.
- Model 12 month DAO cash flow, updated once per quarter. Due by the second week of S1.
- Refine budget application and approval process.
- Guide discussion on $CODE delegation process.
KPIs:
- Final S1 treasury balance within 15% of proposal
- Define Delegation process (if any) by Snapshot vote.
Temporality and Rewards:
- $3000 monthly dollars, for one season.
This seems like of the highest impact set of tasks and goals but with the lowest reward, interested to understand why. Believe finance should sit with ops (at least for S1 as there are legal/Tax implications for the decisions that may be made. A lot the ground work for finances has already been done with the current ops team so feels like it would make sense for this to live there, with an aim to decentralised treasury management out (maybe to itās own guild?) once weāre confident we understand the ins and outs of tax/finance/legal
Most of the rest of it seems relatively straight forward although taking a break and will look again. One important questions left, did you speak with any of the guilds re these changes beforehand?