Renee, as always, I appreciate and respect your perspective!
I completely agree.
The role within ESD is a big contributor to my burnout, as a result of which I had to switch to 3 days per week at AA in April (something that I have shared with you). Honestly, that you continue to see me as “the enemy” as it comes across from your post is hurtful. Everyone who has tried to contribute to the network while being part of both the AA and the AN DAO has been on the receiving end of being branded as “the enemy” at some point over the past six months, whether it has been @Anthony.Leuts@AlexClay or @b3n.
Because I believe trying to salvage this initiative is a fight worth fighting. From your post, I gather my contribution is not appreciated; if this is a widely shared consensus, I am happy to hear the community members who feel this way and resign from the ESD. Can I entrust you to facilitate the process in a way that will protect their privacy if they choose to remain private?
My role within the AA had very little to do with the AN DAO until June 2022. The only touch-point until that point was the launch of dTech. Any time spent with the AN DAO or any collaboration effort has been in my capacity as a community member and a token holder.
I apologize for taking 3 days to get to this. Were these documents helpful, honestly? Neither the strategies nor sharing them only with the ESD were sufficient efforts - my focus was to attempt to convince the team to share them with everyone (as in Aragon’s community and the larger web3 ecosystem), as I told you at the time.
Also happy to not receive anything from the coordinape circle or forgo the base compensation or both if that will sit better with the community. Deciding in this thread or putting it up for a vote is up to you.
Agreed to the performance against deliverables to address the imbalance and value-added.
I’m sorry to hear that ESD team members feel under appreciated. I personally greatly value your contributions and as mentioned before, believe all contributors who bring incredible value to the Aragon ecosystem, should be compensated and celebrated. Clearly a pain point that we need to address as we further decentralise.
This is another reason I believe we need to continue to simplify the system and reduce complexity.
You have my gratitude and love and I will vote yes on an increase in a base salary to support your continued effort, if as mentioned, the imbalances are taken into consideration.
A couple of quick points here from a completely objective basis, I am not going to get in to some points as I am one who has contributed to some of the problems.
We can not expect people to be engaged on 200 ANT per month and therefore can’t then alter the funding for a ongoing basis based on this information. I think looking at past engagement based on this is unfair and not helpful. The fact that Renee has stuck around and worked super hard should be rewarded, not punished because others have not been paid to stay up to date which they should not have been expected to. I also feel this as a personal failure to have not have solved sooner.
I think 2500 is the bare minimum that we should expect to allow people to stay up to date alone.
Agree to the retroactively and would like to see this in April as well start of the season.
On the AA to AN DAO this should be solved ASAP, I am trying to opt in for additional work, I am opting out of funding for the two circles this season. It is now getting personally more difficult as we become more and more integrated to make this distinction and lines are getting blurred.
I will be voting yes for the base, for the retroactive reimbursement and fully back all the work that you have done in a very challenging environment.
I think Alex has summed it up nice and succinctly. If it provides clarity until delegation design becomes clear and the contributing members of the ESD find it reasonable I will vote for it.
Two other things:
This ESD group should engage with the umbrella team to 1, get help navigating these tricky topics and 2, be an example of change to the rest of the DAO and community who have to sit here and watch your complicated energy play out on the forum.
The pathway to ruin runs through segmenting ourselves by whether we have historically been in the DAO or the AA teams. One thing is universal and that is everyone has a desire to see the best version of Aragon possible
Thank you for the added perspective, Alex. Indeed I have given the initial faulty design substantially more attention than it deserves.
I would request any voted base payment be transferred directly to unchain.fund for as long as I receive my salary from the AA. This will also remove my personal conflict and allow me to support the proposal as keeping @lee0007 in the community and compensating her fairly for her efforts is more important for the network.
Problem: Here is something we can all agree on - burnout.
Solution: My response to that burnout was dGov my attempt to decentralise my work within the ESD. I experienced a problem and created a proposal to address it. Same here above with @daniel-ospina leadership and your support.
Problem: All three of us [ESD] are perceived as the “enemy” at times, it seems inherent in the role which lacks any visibility into the time we put into this. I can see this with
imo failed to coordinape funding efforts and
the disparity that comes with the security of fixed remuneration via AA and
the privilege your role affords in terms of building context and access to information
Solution: Suggest a % reduction of DAO rewards in some way [TBD] proportionate to the AA-funded role.
Problem: I am aware of my characteristic tendency to focus on what we can improve (performance-driven orientation) versus what is already very good, as seen here.
Solution: I am sorry that I failed to communicate that I greatly value working with you Ivan and for the record, I believe
you are mission-critical to the success of this DAO
you informed my understanding of transparency - easy access to clear, concise information
you have modelled this well and delivered processes to help guide transparency throughout the community
you proposed dTech, the DAO’s first great success story
I value your pragmatic approach
I value that we have diverse perspectives and different approaches to the ESD role.
Also for the record, strategic alignment is something we ask of all proposal authors, the documents @joeycharlesworth supplied were the key source of strategic alignment and his feedback provided me with the most overall support in the authoring of those proposals.
Problem: I value your work within the ESD because I have visibility into your contributions and experience of the time and effort it requires. However, the community does not have that visibility. While I did not raise the question of the value you add I do propose a
Problem: I do and will always struggle with anyone that poses problems without a solution.
Solution: can we perhaps agree that in raising problems we also present at least one solution, so that we can focus on the solution vs the problem AND take responsibility for actioning the solutions we suggest
To Alex’s point, the lines are becoming blurred which is a good thing!
Problem: I do not see zero-funding as the right solution for @fartunov@AlexClay@b3n@mheuer@jessicasmith anyone operating across multiple teams. Given we are trying to encourage people to transition toward the DAO from the AA there’s a desperate need to solve the issue of fair contributor rewards. This is certainly not a problem I can solve. I know DAO compensation is something high on @b3n radar I know this is something @daniel-ospina has done a tonne of research and work around too.
Solution: As discussed at this morning’s ESD General Meeting the ESD have agreed to release short term (S1) funding for strategic hires and to secure external expertise. We see @b3n as having the highest context and people expertise to identify the right people for the role(s).
Problem: Opting out of Coordinape circles - so as not to accrue rewards - also disrupts the ability to fairly allocate funding proportionately to the help I receive from all DAO participants. We need people like @Alex@fartunov@mheuer in these circles at times. Zero rewards provide no incentive to participate and help to reward and express gratitude for others.
Question: Where people do not participate, should that funding remain unspent or be divided proportionately to the allocated GIVE?
Solution: the ESD has in past discussed a percentage decrease of around 50% in the DAO awarded funding. In the case of a coordinape circle, this would reduce by 50% the reward allocation with the other 50% divided proportionately to the other participants?
Thanks for this @lee0007 I am happy to test the proposal and see how we go. I agree it is not efficient to opt out as it will skew the results. Agree on urgently solving the compensation problem and great to hear we are looking for experts on it!
I don’t have anything else to add here other than I have found the Executive SubDAO to be doing a great job and would like to extend gratitude to @fartunov@daniel-ospina and @lee0007 for their efforts, especially given the limited compensation they have received to date, and I feel what is being requested is more than fair all considered.
I believe there is a great and urgent need to work out and clarify compensation and benefits across the DAO as the merge draws near. I understand @b3n is working on this and I look forward to hear more as this process gets underway.
Hey, yes indeed. As we discussed on one of the ESD AMAs the first message constitutes the proposal, the rest is discussion. As the update/change was not reflected I did not take the liberty to include it into the vote