As a verified delegate, I believe this proposal is ready for a vote.
Org & Gov design wise, the delegates serve as a sort of top level body for decision making. Thatās more or less equivalent to the role that Boards of director have in corporations, of trustees in a non profits, etc.
So basically the discussion about compensation can not be separated from a discussion around governance design, and inquiring deeper into the desired role delegates play feels essential. For such exploration, comparing the list of responsibilities to that of a traditional Board is a good starting point IMO.
just had a time to go through the proposed breakdown spreadsheet and it all looks good. my only worry is participation on the calls which are not recognized due to other usernames / nicknames alas - thats how goes
thanks @eugene and the rest for meaningful conversations here
Hi @jensei,
Thanks so much for your feedback!
Youāre absolutely right - gathering all the data wasnāt always straightforward. Both @eugene and I did our best to account for all possible usernames, and we posted several CTAs inviting folks to reach out if they believed their call counts were off.
That said, weāre definitely open to improving this process going forward - feel free to share any ideas you might have.
Thanks for your reply and the clarification - appreciate it. Happy to continue this conversation on the DAO call tomorrow.
Here is some part of my rationale for this proposal.
voting in FAVOUR
Sustaining delegate engagement is key for the DAO to progress. And the system is design to evolve the mechanism, so Iām happy to see this moving forward.
Hereās our rationale for the GCR program.
Cross-posting for visibility:
To kick things off, weāre sharing the draft application form here to gather community feedback before it officially opens.
Please drop any comments or suggestions by Sunday night (June 8, your local time) so we can make adjustments ahead of Mondayās launch. A separate announcement will follow once the form goes live.