It is wrong that this analysis doesn’t attempt to figure out a sustainable pay model, only justify the current pay rates. It is also wrong that the community was not consulted on the pay models. It is wrong that the analysis is designed backwards to justify the status quo.
Who decided that non-profit pay models are exploitative? Is that a position of Gitcoin? Was the community of GTC holders consulted on this decision? If not, what give this position legitimacy?
As a GTC holder, I believe GitcoinDAO should stop fucking up its enormous lead from years ago when Vitalik blessed it and deliver a protocol that distributes value at scale. The protocol should accrue value at a scale that justifies it’s $130 million market cap (which used to be over $ 1 billion, and is declining week by week). And contributors to Gitcoin can be rewarded with generous pay when you do so (but not beforehand).
The recent protocol alpha rounds are a good start. But they’re just a start.
According to this post it looks like there are plenty of other public goods funding DAOs! And many of them are WAY more capital efficient than GitcoinDAO. I hope you include those in your analysis.
I hope this analysis is scrapped altogether or reworked to be legitimate.
The market is going to be bear for a while. I don’t see anything on gov.gitcoin.co that makes me think people who work on Gitcoin have a serious plan for getting through the bear market. This downward spiral is NOT GOOD.
