Compensation Structure for DAO Contributors

[ethen]

@Jinx

In terms of protocol development, @Olshansky is. And he outlined in your other post about the need for structure on that. and @h5law has shown how effective that can be, turning in a number of bounties for reward. This is a very agile approach to development that works similarly to how dev orgs I’ve led in the past work.

@ethen

Thank you for responding Daniel. I trust that you have it all taken care of and are monitoring the development closely.

Feeding off Daniels point though -

Just because PNI has it all taken care of on v1, doesn’t mean that payouts are not needed to the external teams for ecosystem development.

@Jinx

The DAO does not have the budget to assume the overhead of full time engineers, and I don’t see an effective way for them to be managed. The Foundation can have full time employees, but they have a specific mandate, and supervisors in the Directors. In a development organization, there are specific architects and leads who provide oversight for dev work, who are hired based on their expertise in that space. The Foundation Directors are not dev or devops or architects, so would be ineffective in managing that workflow.

The DAO absolutely has funds to hire sign on engineers. You were just willing to quickly accept a 33% looting of the DAO treasury to PNI but now you all of a sudden want oversight of the rest of the community.

We need to drop the hire thing in crypto. No one gets hired in crypto. You get signed!

@Jinx

I’ve personally worked freelance on multimillion dollar projects that stretched out over the course of a year. The entire FOSS movement has shown that there’s no need for an FTE structure to accomplish major things (Linux is perhaps the single greatest example of that). And having managed devops orgs in the past, capacity planning and utilization is one of the greatest challenges with FTE engineers, given the cost to benefit ratios of one of the most expensive resource classes in the org.

Please don’t lecture me on your past wins. You and your team have developed nothing of value for Pocket Network. Sure you’ve onboarded thousands of users, but a spreadsheet and 6 months to get a landing page up is not my idea of moving fast and breaking things.

In the past 24 months Ritesh and I have done over 8 rebrands and pushed out projects like Copper, mistX, SendNodes and SendWallet. SendWallet is the best staking for retail in the network and its not even close.

Of all people, you are the last one who should be advising on compensation structures for the best engineers our community has to offer. As you’ve shown in the past and continue to show, you are way too biased.

@Jinx

I see that you disagree; I just don’t understand why. All of the available evidence points to the bounty approach being both well managed in the way that Daniel needs, and an easy route for new contributors to immediately begin participating, like Harry has.

@Olshansky

@ethen You covered a lot of different topics above. The only one I’d like to respond to is on the topic of V1 development.

I don’t worry about V1 development, we’re way passed that.