Newly approved [90:10](Aragon Voice) And at this point, until the Charter is changed 200 ANT is non-negotiable. The point is to have some fixed reward above the 200 ANT. For Daniel and I this is the only fixed reward we receive within the DAO, despite the fact I undertake other work.
Unfortunately, while I have directly helped to fund nearly every other contributor - it took Daniel and I reaching burnout to try to remedy the situation. It’s been a thankless and isolating role and still fails to pay anywhere near what we would be paid to execute IRL at this level.
Appreciate the recognition that the work is NOT evenly distributed and it’s been near impossible to have the additional work rewarded fairly while also accounting for the fact that @fartunov has a paid role within the AA which goes a long way to building context that Daniel and I undertake in our own time.
Thanks for the vote of confidence @alibama dGov is now in place to support the existing governance bodies - ESD Tech & Compliance - See my reply to Harry above ^^^ re the long-term existence of the ESD
@fartunov again! lol, this puce pink stands out well on the forum. I applied in good faith as it did not appear rigged to me. I appreciate your point of view on the rigged election but then why would you knowingly take part?
You have repeated your perspective on every possible occasion while taking NO ACTION to remedy the situation. You are paid the most to be here as a member of the ESD, you have the context of also working within the AA and yet did not provide me with the strategic documents needed in the S1 funding round. @joeycharlesworth asked you to and supplied them himself when they were not forthcoming. You could have been creating and passing proposals to remedy your concerns. I am not the only one that sees this.
Agree on financial transparency. Should this also include your AA work too or at least some percentage of it? How do we fairly account for the cross-over here? Here is what we have for Financial Transparency cc @AlexClay @Ricktik6
Imo the coordinape circle fails entirely to account for the fact of people also employed within the Aragon Association a role that provides both privilege and time to build context that neither Daniel nor I have. @AlexClay as you operate in a similar situation what % of DAO payment rewards do you think should be waived by AA members to account for the privilege, access to information and time your paid roles attract? I would like to know especially in regards to coordinape funding where this seems to be most evident and possibly impacting participation rates?
Rather than coordinape, my suggestion has always been that we have a fixed reward reduced based on performance against deliverables, with no extra reward paid for anything less than 80% across all deliverables
This would help address the imbalance @Anthony.Leuts has identified and the concerns @alibama raised for the value-added. I am currently reporting on behalf of the entire team, so if this funding is awarded I would ask we vote to make it performance-based and that we each report to the community on individual accountability against KPI’S.
As per the ESD General meeting this morning I am going to propose the ESD release funding for @AlexClay based on our ability to make grants to other community members. And will remove this from the original proposal above.