[Budget] Rewarding Community Board Members (July and August)

1

Context

Since inception of the DAO early July, many Community Board members have been not only challenging and voting Council’s proposals, but also contributing to core activities of the project, including:

  • Project management: planning and documentation
  • Product testing: unit testing and end-to-end testing
  • Product strategy: benchmark and market analysis
  • User support and community moderation
  • PR and Communication

Above activities are critical to the success of any open-source and community-driven project.

This proposal suggests that active and committed Ref’s Community Board members get rewarded.

Reminder: more information on the current DAO structure Governance of Ref Finance. Ref is first and foremost a community… | by Ref Finance | Medium

Objectives

  1. Reward active and committed Community Board members
  2. Identify and reward top contributors for ‘specific works’ and ‘key deliverables’

Proposal

1. Reward active and committed Community Board members

As recently defined in the Ref Finance’s Wiki, Being a Community Board member involves responsibilities. This includes:

  • Challenging Council’s proposals
  • Sharing his / her opinion(s) on different topics raised by the Community
  • Being proactive and acting in the protocol’s best interests
  • Exercising independent judgement (Board members should not be delegates who simply implement the commands of other parties)
  • Exercising his / her voting right
  • Participating to the weekly community call

I propose the following reward structure.

Amount: capped to 200 REF per Community Board member / month

Payment: at the end of the month

July payout (due)

  • Harry: 200 REF > thb0301.near
  • Blaze: 200 REF > blaze.near
  • Danielo: 200 REF > messagebox.near
  • Ozy: 200 REF > ozymandius.near
  • Alen (Minh Hieu): 200 REF > hieunmben100.near
  • Khbw: 200 REF > khbw.near
  • Ronnie: 200 REF > wmheng.near
  • Rim: 200 REF > rimberjack.near
  • Chluff: 200 REF > chluff.near
  • AVB: 200 REF > alejandro.near
  • Youbin: 200 REF > diamond.near
  • Didier: 200 REF > colibri.near

August payout (due)

  • Harry: 200 REF > thb0301.near
  • Blaze: 200 REF > blaze.near
  • Danielo: 200 REF > messagebox.near
  • Alen (Minh Hieu): 200 REF > hieunmben100.near
  • Khbw: 200 REF > khbw.near
  • Ronnie: 200 REF > wmheng.near
  • Rim: 200 REF > rimberjack.near
  • Chluff: 200 REF > chluff.near
  • AVB: 200 REF > alejandro.near
  • Didier: 200 REF > colibri.near
  • Peter: 200 REF > peterflux.near

2. Identify and reward top contributors for ‘specific works’ and ‘key deliverables’

Top contributors can be identified as any Community Board member who works on specific deliverable(s), in addition to his / her Community Board responsibilities and commitments.

Amount: capped to 600 REF per Community Board member / month

Payment: at the end of the month

July and August payouts (due)

  • Rim: 1,200 REF > rimberjack.near
  • Danielo: 1,200 REF > messagebox.near
  • Blaze: 1,200 REF > blaze.near
  • AVB: 1,200 REF > alejandro.near
  • Harry: 1,200 REF > thb0301.near
  • Didier: 1,200 REF > colibri.near

Deliverables: details below

Delivery: User support and Telegram Channel Moderation

Date: ongoing

Estimated hours: 1.5 - 2 hours / day (started on the 6th of August)

Contributor(s):

  • Rim

Delivery: Product testing v2

Date: 23 August 2021

Link: DAO’s Basecamp

Estimated hours: 2-3 hours / tester

Contributor(s):

  • Blaze
  • AVB
  • Harry
  • Didier

Delivery: Product farming v1

Date: 22-30 July 2021

Link: DAO’s Basecamp

Estimated hours: 4-5 hours (including workshops with dev team) / tester

Contributor(s):

  • Danielo
  • Didier

Delivery: Quickswap Case Study

Date: 14 June 2021

Link: DAO’s Basecamp

Estimated hours: 1-5 days

Contributor(s):

  • Harry
  • Alen (Minh Hieu)

Delivery: Weekly Community Call Business Minutes

Date: ongoing

Link: DAO’s Basecamp

Estimated hours: 1 hour / business minutes

Contributor(s):

  • Rim
  • Didier
4 Likes
2

I would recommend as an addendum or separate proposal, to have rewards for moderators and other key community support resources.

3 Likes
3

Following the last Weekly Community Call and Community Board Members’ feedback, please find below a new version of the proposal.

Lacking internal support and momentum, I suggest three amendments relating to the initial proposal.

  1. Re alignment of REF incentives taking into account REF’s current USD price: (the initial proposal being made a long time ago) - From 200 REF for level 1 contribution to 100 REF and from 600 REF for level 2 contribution to 300 REF

  2. Rewarding moderators: mods are part of the team and their works and commitments are a key piece of Ref’s success - 100 REF / month

Context

Since inception of the DAO early July, many Community Board members have been not only challenging and voting Council’s proposals, but also contributing to core activities of the project, including:

  • Project management: planning and documentation
  • Product testing: unit testing and end-to-end testing
  • Product strategy: benchmark and market analysis
  • User support and community moderation
  • PR and Communication

Above activities are critical to the success of any open-source and community-driven project.

This proposal suggests that active and committed Ref’s Community Board members get rewarded.

Reminder: more information on the current DAO structure Governance of Ref Finance. Ref is first and foremost a community… | by Ref Finance | Medium

Objectives

  1. Reward active and committed Community Board members
  2. Identify and reward top contributors for ‘specific works’ and ‘key deliverables’
  3. Reward moderators

Proposal

1. Reward active and committed Community Board members

As recently defined in the Ref Finance’s Wiki, Being a Community Board member involves responsibilities. This includes:

  • Challenging Council’s proposals
  • Sharing his / her opinion(s) on different topics raised by the Community
  • Being proactive and acting in the protocol’s best interests
  • Exercising independent judgement (Board members should not be delegates who simply implement the commands of other parties)
  • Exercising his / her voting right
  • Participating to the weekly community call

I propose the following reward structure.

Amount: capped to 100 REF per Community Board member / month

Payment: at the end of the month

July payout (due)

  • Harry: 100 REF > thb0301.near
  • Blaze: 100 REF > blaze.near
  • Danielo: 100 REF > messagebox.near
  • Ozy: 100 REF > ozymandius.near
  • Alen (Minh Hieu): 100 REF > hieunmben100.near
  • Khbw: 100 REF > khbw.near
  • Ronnie: 100 REF > wmheng.near
  • Rim: 100 REF > rimberjack.near
  • Chluff: 100 REF > chluff.near
  • AVB: 100 REF > alejandro.near
  • Youbin: 100 REF > diamond.near

August payout (due)

  • Harry: 100 REF > thb0301.near
  • Blaze: 100 REF > blaze.near
  • Danielo: 100 REF > messagebox.near
  • Alen (Minh Hieu): 100 REF > hieunmben100.near
  • Khbw: 100 REF > khbw.near
  • Ronnie: 100 REF > wmheng.near
  • Rim: 100 REF > rimberjack.near
  • Chluff: 100 REF > chluff.near
  • AVB: 100 REF > alejandro.near
  • Peter: 100 REF > peterflux.near

2. Identify and reward top contributors for ‘specific works’ and ‘key deliverables’

Top contributors can be identified as any Community Board member who works on specific deliverable(s), in addition to his / her Community Board responsibilities and commitments.

Amount: capped to 300 REF per Community Board member / month

Payment: at the end of the month

July and August payouts (due)

  • Rim: 600 REF > rimberjack.near
  • Danielo: 600 REF > messagebox.near
  • Blaze: 600 REF > blaze.near
  • AVB: 600 REF > alejandro.near
  • Harry: 600 REF > thb0301.near

Deliverables: [Budget] Rewarding Community Board Members (July and August)

3. Reward moderators

Moderators bring experience to the community by providing community guidelines and answering questions/ assisting the public when/ where possible. Community Moderators are also expected to take an active role, posing questions where appropriate.

Moderators’ skills are, not limited to:

  • Detail oriented and up to date on current events
  • Solid decision-making skills and sound judgment to report inappropriate content on the community forums
  • Strong English written communication skills
  • Flexible and open to working various schedules

Moderation mediums: Telegram Channel and Discord

Estimated hours: 1 - 2 hours / day (depending on ‘peak crypto season’)

August payouts (due)

  • @rimberjack: 100 REF > rimberjack.near
  • @SanketN81: 100 REF > To Be Found
  • @benstg: 100 REF > To Be Found
  • @cudam321: 100 REF > To Be Found
3 Likes
4

Just wondering how the board members were elected? All familiar faces again. Some people also involved in other guilds and full time near activities.

1 Like
5

Community Board Members were elected by the Council. Criteria included, not only:

  • Early interest in the protocol and its development
  • Proven track record in providing value / insights within the community
  • Ability to engage with the community

You can check more info about the current DAO here: Governance of Ref Finance. Ref is first and foremost a community… | by Ref Finance | Medium

6

Hi Didier,

First I’d like to thank you for all the time and effort you’ve put into these proposals.

As it was discussed during the Community Call 22/09, I believe that the new proposal has the following issues:

  1. Remuneration should not be modified retroactively. There’s a bunch of reasons why this is the case. Some of them being:
  • There is an explicit understanding that when a person gets remunerated in Tokens (magic money printed out of thin air) they are assuming all the risk: they show up regardless of the token being worth $0.01 or $10. Remuneration in tokens is designed for people to capture the upside.
  • Most Board members have been active since June (even though we forfeited remuneration from that month) and agreed upon remuneration from July onwards.
  • It would be extremely unfair to assess the value of contributions made in July with October prices.
  • Changing prices retroactively would set a negative precedent: by taking longer to pay people, you later pay them less. We must acknowledge that the processes aren’t perfect, we are defining them as we go, and in the future these kind of payouts and proposals should have much faster turnaround. We should not create incentives to delay eternally trying to game the market.
  • Opportunity costs. The current lengthy delays in approving and making these payments represent an opportunity cost: just one example would be the additional REF that could’ve been generated from farming for that period of time. No compensation is being asked or expected for this.
  1. Conversations about adjusting the ongoing remuneration for Community Board members are approrpriate, but must only be done on a forward looking basis.
  • Conversation between past (accrued and overdue) payments and future remuneration should be separate.
  • Discussion around future remuneration should be based around simple, general principles such as ‘Remuneration maxes out at $x per month, when the ceiling is hit, the amount of REF can be reduced’. These are meant to make it clear to everyone from the outset what to expect.
  • Any considerations of future remuneration should be reasonable, but generous. We want to be able to attract, engage, and retain the best talent which is in extreme high demand.
  • Considerations of remuneration should be based on the value having a Community Board provides - Decentralisation and community engagement - rather than the value any one individual stands to gain. The former makes it look cheap (reasonable), the second one may be considered expensive (outrageous) by some.
  1. Community Board Expectations and Fairness
  • It goes without saying that with a monthly remuneration, the expectations of Board Members to remain active and engaged change.
  • I would give the benefit of the doubt to most members now, even those who have been inactive for a while, given there’s been a potential misalignment of incentives (no remuneration and shifting standards which make people feel under appreciated).
  • Going forward, clear expectations must be set and met. The current Board needs to be updated to remove inactive members AND;
  • The Board must remain open to considering new members. Let’s think of a process for people to express interest in joining.

Most of the attendees of the Community Call 22/09 agree with the ideas and sentiments above, although I encourage everyone to add their thoughts and ideas to this thread in a timely manner.

Looking forward to approving the original proposal, settling the overdue amounts, and, if necessary, beginning a separate conversation on future funding.

2 Likes
7

Thank you Didier for setting up this proposal.

About the remuneration adjustment retroactively, I definitely agree with AVB that it’s unfair for Community Board who took the disadvantages when the price increase (which should be in the opposite direction lol). → The suggestion to cap the maximum USD per month to receive in REF and snapshot at a choosable day of a month is a perfect solution in the future.

I think we should promptly review the current Community Board, remove any inactive members and seek out for new talent, as AVB said earlier.

Anw, read all the suggestions and agree 100% with you guys. I hope this proposal will be reviewed soon

2 Likes
8

I also agree with not change the retroactive rewards as the were “accrued” at the time the elrewards were originally discussed.

In addition, changes should be proposed via governance and not be applied retroactively as that has the potential to create percieved manipulation or favoritism.

Overall, I am in agreement with what has been proposed, but also understand that we need a larger audience to weigh in on these decisions.

2 Likes