Thank you for your detailed response Joe.
I had a further look at the different fundings of the other workstreams and the work you guys have done and your plans. I still have some reserves and would hope to see more communication done between the different parts of the Gitcoin DAO but I voted in the snapshot in favor of the proposal.
I appreciate your thoughts on this. It is my opinion that this ^^ is actually the default we want, but there should be some safety net where if budgets take longer to process, those who are performing do not suffer (this is likely the case for much âthinnerâ workstreams). I am interested in DAOs disrupting the status quo of âI have a stable paycheck even if I donât deliver results for the DAO (barring legitimate reasons).â
I would love to align on a reasonable reserve for all workstreams as part of S13 execution, and the concession has me really conflicted. A no vote feels harsh given the timelines it takes for budgets to be approved, and that is something I want to lean into as well during S13. (ie, should it take 15 days to get budgets approved, and if so, how do we make sure the budgets are approved with enough time to confirm operations and sort out differences). I will likely abstain from the vote, and not vote no as I also want to act in good faith with the concessions being offered here.
I agree it is a bit unfair for the entire workstream to be without funding while process runs and I would not want to create a culture of anxiety around the budgeting process. I also dont think we should tie the outcomes of a large workstream all together (ie, is Ground Control is not performing, and Sybil is⌠Should all funding be withheld?). I look forward to discussing more and I am optimistic we may see some bigger changes ahead of S14.
I suppose in this case having a reserve could or would be the solution to support our contributor and reduce the stress/anxiety over payments that must be done/past due
The Steward mandate is to get a voice for/from your delegate and them with your judgement split the decision (With of course your understanding of the requested form/proposal/budget
At this point, doing a restructuration of the FDD Ground control or the FDD as a hole, is quite a bit late in the process. Gitcoin Grants Round 13 is starting in less 20 days and I think we should keep the workstream as it is.
Summarizing this post, I would like to clearly see from the steward who are going to vote no or oppose to this proposal, state in a few bullets points what should we change and why
As a quick update, I voted No on this as opposed to abstaining so that we could meet the threshold as I believe ensuring the communityâs will is more important than my single concerns (knowing my no vote will push us past quorum, but not block the progress).
No votes shouldnât count towards quorum⌠that seems like a flaw in the system honestly.
Maybe I should start a moratorium⌠h/t to Vlad, Gun, and Dino
RE: Reserves
Just to throw my hat in the ring here⌠I would advocate for ALL work streams to have budget for continuing their work if Governance is slow⌠If we donât do that, there are 2 options:
#1 (most likely) Individuals step up and take on risk to continue the work, either by paying people out of their own pocket or by working with the risk of not being paid.
#2 Critical infrastructure fails.
This is not good business. We need a solution that doesnât allow for either of those options.
Until another solution emerges, having a reserve for each work stream is just smart and real, Governance in DAOs is slow and unpredictable, and a prudent work stream lead should prepare for funding issues if they are stewarding critical infrastructure. A Reserve creates a buffer for the Work stream to continue or transition as needed without having to pause payments. People have bills to pay and we need to create a safety net so they can continue to work and pay those bills even if the unexpected happens.