by 0xed0e0cb94f60f72ec94bef848f5df4cbd365af1d (InJesterr)
I find this proposal very urgent & fully believe that this is what the DAO needs to keep the GSS.
I wan’t to make the GSS an official squad of the DAO, by giving them a certain amount of salary monthly each all equally paid with tasks that are written so that we can have both rules, safety & certainty to not lose them.
This way they don’t have to apply for grants like grantees & we know exactly what they stand for.
What are the tasks going to be?
The GSS will operate as an official team just like the DAO comittee, SAB & RC.
They will give new grantees a warm welcome and handful tips & advice after their grant passes.
On the first meeting the grantee is given 30 days to create a public roadmap on the GSS notion.
The GSS follow all the grantees updates, Its important to follow and guide the grantees during their period by giving them a scheduling monthly meetings after each update.
The GSS must process formal requests. When a Formal request is sent, The GSS can determine if its necessary to build the case.
The GSS is holding weekly testdays with projects that needs to be tested.
The GSS is accountable to verify metrics of grantees.
What are the rules going to be?
The GSS helps people to create a public roadmap.
The GSS will then verify and check grantees on monthly meetings to reach their goals on their roadmap.
If a deadline isn’t met the GSS needs to verify if its possible to continue with the project, if the project cannot continue they can build a proposal pausing the grant immediately and send it to the RC after voting is done.
If a deadline isn’t met but the grantees tells its possible to work around it to still continue with the project the GSS needs to keep an close eye on this subject for the upcomming meeting
If a deadline isn’t met and the grantee tells that it will be done the with in a new time frame, The GSS needs to discuss firmly with the grantee about a new date and point a new date which will be final.
The GSS points out 1 Coordinator among them and select up to 4 max grant managers.
Sr. Grant & Acountability Manager
(3) Grant Manager
The GSS works as transparent as possible.
The GSS meetings must be availible in English ( or the grantee needs to bring a translator ) to communicate.
The GSS is able to coordinate and schedule meetings with grantees on multiple timezones
When the Acountability Manager is building a case after a formal request, They can start a proposal of 3-7 days to determine together with the community wether it needs to be sent to the RC or not.
The proposal needs to include a link to the Formal Request.
The proposal needs to inculde a reply formal reply from a Grantee.
The proposal needs to include only objective material.
When scheduling a testday it must be done coordinated with the grantee first.
Collecting data for Metrics must be FREE and accessible by everyone just like https://dcl-metrics.com/, This way everyone in the community can verify transparently if this is correct or not.
When voting yes you get 7 salary options to apply for the members of the GSS
Yes, I vote that the official GSS gets paid 2,500$ monthly
Yes, I vote that the official GSS gets paid 2,250$ monthly
Yes, I vote that the official GSS gets paid 2,000$ monthly
Yes, I vote that the official GSS gets paid 1,750$ monthly
Yes, I vote that the official GSS gets paid 1,500$ monthly
Yes, I vote that the official GSS gets paid 1,250$ monthly
Yes, I vote that the official GSS gets paid 1,000$ monthly
In the Draft I will add suggested critical rules & tasks that the community comes up with.
As much as I have had my issues with the GSS I think this all came because of miscommunications between each other and don’t think we need to make such a crucial team leave for over a grant.
Also in the DRAFT I want to announce the canditates that want to take these tasks & rules, also I want to give the current GSS the opportunity to become part of this because they already have been around and know the what the job is about + they probably have an entire working system already. @yararasita@palewin@Zino@fifitango please let me know if this comes to pass would you like to agree on the salary and terms so that I can add you as canditates in the draft & final?
I like the idea of GSS having a monthly salary similar to the current DAO committee structure, instead of having to request for a 6 month grant. They indeed should be a core unit like the DAO committee. What the compensation package looks like - is debatable.
The current GSS members are grantees, These people will become officials.
It doesn’t have to be the same team that we have right now, we can do a process where we hire a member through application and if the current GSS wants to be part of this they can also become candidates too.
Yeah feel free to vote invalid as no, although I didn’t do this intentional actually I should have done a NO option too your right.
but you see I am not happy with the current gss so I wanted to promote a squad to officials with rules and limits to their power also they cant include traveling and any other nonsense they want without a community decision & and this all for a much lower price then 200k+ per year because they apply every 6 months. Having a team of 4 with this current model:
If you vote 1,000$ it pays 48k per year
If you vote 1,250$ it pays 60k per year
If you vote 1,500$ it pays 72k per year
If you vote 1,750$ it pays 84k per year
If you vote 2,000$ it pays 96k per year
If you vote 2,250$ it pays 108k per year
If you vote 2,500$ it pays 120k per year
So per year with all these options the DAO spends much less on the GSS.
To make my intention clear with you and play it with open cards. The current GSS are imo people that got a huge salary and support for a job a 16 year old can do. They include bs like traveling in their grants which is ridiculous to ask for a squad that has to sit on his cheeks for 6 hours for 5 days and act like they hold anyone accountable for their grant while they do none of these things.
They have no clue how to play decentraland and have no one in their team that is even able to look at in- world projects code to verify if a job is done or not but I acknowledge we need a team that is able to hold grantees accountable.
LOL so we vote no on their new grant and boom problem solved they need to come up with a better proposed grant if they would like to keep that position, yet here you are proposing them to be DAO officials, smh
@CheddarQueso Also I just found out that your proposal passed for financial reports.
I think if this passes that we need +1 task which is
The GSS must be check financial reports from grantees on the monthly meetings.
Also some rules for these like:
To support grantees with these reports the GSS has to share what they expect from the grantee on the first meeting and give examples and templates.
The GSS needs to be able to share the financial reports transparently.
The Grantee has to deliver these reports in a written in a document.
If a grantee fails to share these reports the
If the GSS sees that a grantees financial report isn’t correct, They have to confront the grantee about this.
If the grantee fails to give clear answers or is shady about the reports the GSS is urged to create a proposal with only objective materials, Jf the community agrees this project will be send through an proposal will be sendto send the project to tbe RC initiating a pause immedieatly.
Them as in whoever the GSS is or would be. Not confused at all I just don’t agree with this proposal.
If community wants the GSS (any team not just the current one) to continue then vote yes on their grant if not then why should we make it an official position. Why is there so much need for DAO to create “official” jobs/positions? It’s a lot more simple now, they don’t do a good job or proposed grant makes little to no sense then we vote no and move on. Why make this process harder? Or easier to lobby for people to get on those positions?
So I stand by my original comment, can it get any worse? Wen fix?