Compensation Structure for DAO Contributors

Love this thread!

Tempted to share more, will double down on a few raised by the community-

  1. Excited to get a glimpse of socket and the RFP process. If bounty is working, why break something that is working!

  2. COLA will be tough to implement for individuals. Should be explored for domiciled companies in the RFP process.

  3. Feel appointed individual (from the PNF) or a committee is the way to go, similar to a “representative democracy” instead of “direct democracy” for each and every decision. The latter may not be scalable.

  4. Budgeting the DAO treasury could be explored; budget allocated to compensation broken down into subcategories such as R&D, RFPs, bounties, abstract projects/innovations, etc. Helps build structure and do better treasury management.

Didn’t see it in the PNF Roadmap. Maybe @Dermot can guide.

  1. Hiring full time employees for the DAO appears debatable but what about proactive annual/quarterly planning of where DAO needs to spend, budget and then seek out resources (from the community or outside). Take a proactive approach instead of reactive and passive.

#4 and #5 are related.

  1. POKT Samaritans can be rewarded quarterly for great community service- chosen by the “representative individual or body”.

  2. As a newcomer/quasi outsider, I see subjectivity, non-standardisation, emotions, politics (possibly) in the funding related posts (not all). While those may not be totally avoidable, how can we move the needle towards structure, standardisation and objectivity.

  3. They key word is “meritocracy;” I suggest it be embraced as one of the core values.

Wondering what the next steps are @Jinx (since you created this post) & @b3n . Or maybe @shane.

Wait for socket, RFP process, DNA results to unfold?

I think there is soft consensus around changes (wherever needed) and putting harder structures in place.

4 Likes