I’m glad @MarcZeller is starting this subject.
Feels like a contributor proposal but also seems to broach the idea of delegate compensation.
It’s been a long-time coming and the need for compensation has been highlighted by Marc’s sheer volume of contributions, votes, and improvement proposals.
This topic has been discussed by many, with teams like ourselves, @PennBlockchain, @lbsblockchain and others iterating on draft proposals to re-coupe gas and justify the investment in Aave.
As an individual contributor, like Marc, it is difficult to engage in Governance without pay.
We’ve advocated for paying DAO contributors as a team before, writing articles such as the following.
I’ll summarize a few reasons which seem relevant
-
no benefits or health insurance; pay is fickle and can change at a moment’s notice; contributors are taking significant risks committing to a DAO vs. a traditional organization.
-
no pay stubs; difficult to sign a lease or secure a loan
-
more pay equals higher quality participants → attracts more talent from Web2 industries; money is persuasive
My two recommendations for this proposal:
1. Let’s not look at compensation in isolation, let’s work on something for all
2. Let’s better align payment levels with industry comps
For compensation, this feels a bit rich. At a quick look, $250k seems reasonable, but this scaled over a 1-year engagement quickly equates to $500,000 a year.
MakerDAO has recently proposed its new delegate structure: MIP101: The Maker Constitution
Rune, a co-founder, outlines the ideal level of compensation for the top delegates as 285.7 MKR; maintaining an “income equivalent to an average full-time global upper management position.”
Let’s compare by using today’s price of MKR:
A quick analysis shows this proposal is 2.5x the levels of the top MakerDAO delegates.
Marc’s passion is deserving of compensation. Let’s prioritize cost consciousness and build towards a model which is scalable and avoids the risk of ballooning contributor budgets.