[DAO:c7f8a3b] Renewal Grant Support Squad H1 2024

Since the position of a DAO Grant Support Squad is relatively new, there isn’t much historical data to reference what an average wage should be across the industry. Here are average wages in the United States for other careers according to Glassdoor. These are starting wages.

($90,247/4= $22,561.75/5 (5 months) =$4,512.35/month * 12 months/year = annual salary of $54,148)

Doctor: $173,877
Dental Hygienist: $90,171
Police Officer: $57,122
DAO Support Squad: $54,148
High School Teacher: $51,403
Wal-Mart Store Manager: $50,864
Emergency Medical Technician: $50,435
Firefighter: $48,592
Starbucks Barista: $32,791

Since there are people behind these positions, I want to take the emotions out of this and just look at the facts in front of us. Most of these careers in the same salary range would require a 4 year degree and require extensive certification to retain employment. Based on this perspective, I believe it is fair for the community to challenge this salary above.


Hi all!

We thank each of you for participating in the discussion and for providing valuable feedback on our proposal.

After carefully analyzing your comments, valuable concerns and suggestions have been raised. We understand that budget and cost considerations are at the forefront regarding the bear market DAO Treasury management, and we take these concerns seriously. Additionally, there is a need for improved communications and transparency.

For that, we want to mention our commitment in that sense, and we started opening processes publicly during this current grant:

  1. Public roadmap: now, the community can track the goals/milestones of each project funded through the Grants Program. Also, we tested the comment section in the cards created, where we take notes regarding the Monthly check-ins collaboratively with the grantees, and we want to move forward integrating the communications in the GovApp
  2. Concerns raised by the community: now the community can track the stage of the process and the communication between the Grant Support Squad, the compliance, and the grantee.
    Also, on this page, the community can see projects that have decided to step down voluntarily, Revocations Committee decisions, and Revocations Committee payments.
  3. Grant analysis Process: Now, the community can read the process that the Grant Support squad follows after a concern is raised. We are still iterating on this process, so there have been some that were flagged here during August, for example, that was very brief, and along with time, we have iterated into more extensive and comprehensive (this was published one month ago in our update#5)
  4. Documentation: we documented our operational processes, and all this systematized work is public (this was published one month ago in our update#5)

We are committed to addressing these concerns and incorporating your suggestions into a new proposal. We believe that your feedback is invaluable in this process.

Thank you once again for your active participation and for holding us accountable. We look forward to presenting a new proposal that reflects the key highlights and suggestions analyzed in your comments.

King regards :slight_smile:

Zino - Grant Support Squad

Hey everyone, I’d just like to say that the work done by this squad is invaluable, and I can’t imagine grants working at all without a dedicated team like this!

There have been other discussions about if we’re giving grants to the right projects or assigning the right amount of budget to them, but I think that’s a different discussion. We need some kind of checking mechanism, at the very least for the grants that are already committed and ongoing.

This team doesn’t only check that things get delivered, it also helps orient projects in the right direction.
A lot of times from inside the foundation we’ve had discussions with Pablo about how to best advise a project so that it can deliver the best value. Pablo has been an invaluable bridge to help the people working on the external project be in sync with what the foundation is doing, ensuring that we don’t fall into chaos and in incompatible or redundant solutions to problems.


Wouldn’t a solution to that be more transparency globally from the Foundation rather than needing a person fetching needed informations for grantees?


still no one has replied to my comments. All this talk about the GSS making sure grants are working and judging what needs to be revoked but in actually the GSS does not handle this. It has been made clear both the reporting of non functioning grants and gathering evidence is the responsibility of the community… Has the GSS revoked a single grant or gathered any evidence on their own?


Yes, they revoked this grant: [DAO:c539e65] 2dcl - DCL’s 2D Alternate Universe: Deployment and Discovery - Governance - Decentraland

@DedHeadJ That’s not accurate, the grantee voluntarily decided to forfeit the grant.

@dogman is clearly asking, who have they revoked on their own initiative by doing their own research and not relying on the community to provide ground work information or research. I think Dogman question is clear and concise, reread his question if you weren’t able to comprehend.

If I am wrong, I am happy to acknowledge that but please DR. no need to be rude. Some couth is appreciated. Please share a grantee that you believe they should have revoked on their own. Of course, excluding your own overpriced grants.

This is precisely what @dogman is saying. We shouldn’t have to do it ourselves. GSS should have the capability to decide which grants should and shouldn’t be revoked. They are clearly not capable since it has been coming directly from the community.

It’s very hard to communicate with you @DedHeadJ because it’s clear that you are biased since you voted for them without doing proper research. Even after the fact they run around Dogman question and ignore him you still vote yes for them lol So what do you and I need to talk about? Lol

@MetaTrekkers I appreciate your feelings, but I also find it difficult to communicate with someone that assumes anything about me. I will agree with community sentiment and support that your grants have been revoked. I do wish you well DR.

@DedHeadJ Thank you A.I. Jenn.:smile:

i am asking if the GSS has independently decided to revoke any grant and gathered evidence themselves. If the main job of the GSS is to act as a filter for the revocation committee surely there is a better option that a self appointed squad that costs half a million dollars over 2 years. I would suggest a system that if a grant receives X number of complaints from active accounts then it is a passed to the revocation committee. At the very least the members of the GSS should be voted on by the community afaik this is not the case


if The GSS could commit to adjusting their scope of work to actively monitoring and seeking out failing grants they would have a stronger case and would earn my support. I would love to hear thoughts from members of the GSS on this issue

I am writing the review based on the experience of Soul Magic as a grantee. The overall experience communicating with GSS has been smooth, and the GSS has shown the commitment to support us on our needs. From the beginning of our grant, GSS was prompt to be in touch with us, set up milestones and proactive to help us solve the blockers along our project development. The team has been responsive to queries and follow ups. In my opinion, GSS is doing a great job in fostering a positive and supportive grantee experience, that deserves to be recognized.

1 Like

Renewal Grant Support Squad H1 2024

This proposal is now in status: REJECTED.

Voting Results:

  • Yes 23% 3,376,810 VP (56 votes)
  • No 73% 10,482,253 VP (77 votes)
  • Abstain 4% 581,856 VP (15 votes)

Hi all!

I want to clarify the grant revocations process and the role played by the Revocations Committee.

Before establishing the Revocations Committee, the Grant Support Squad -according to the goal when the task force was created, one of our goals was to signal to the DAO when a vesting contract needs to be revoked, based on our concerns. Our process involved gathering information, engaging with the grantee, and seeking inputs from advisors who could confirm or refute our findings. This approach served as a double-check on the information available. In that stage, funds related to 13 projects were revoked or recovered, totaling $165,119.

After nearly a year of following this procedure, our team and the community began to recognize that it concentrated a significant amount of power within a single entity. As a response to this concern, the Revocations Committee was established trhough a governance proposal. Its purpose was to review our recommendations and allow grantees to engage with an impartial third party, thus ensuring a more fair and transparent process. In this stage, funds related to 8 projects were revoked or recovered, totaling $303,450 (all made possible thanks to investigations or interventions by the GSS).

Under this new procedure, our responsibilities expanded. We continue to gather evidence from the community through the formal request form, but we conduct our investigations to compare the new evidence with our findings. This comparison is crucial as it determines whether the case is legitimate or not. If the outcome confirms the need for revocation, we send the case to the Revocations Committee for an impartial assessment and to execute a decision. During this phase, grantees can present new evidence or explore alternative arrangements and conditions to fulfill their projects.

It’s worth noting that four cases have been sent to the Revocations Committee, and in each instance, their decisions confirmed our recommendations. Vesting contracts were revoked, and in some cases, new commitments were established to continue. However, none of these cases led to the resumption of the original vesting contracts of the grants.

Here you can check all the information about the cases that had been analyzed.. Thank you @DedHeadJ for mentioned that case. here you can find all the cases.

In response to @dogman Under the new framework of the grants program, the community members can raise concerns and provide evidence. Our role goes beyond investigation; it also involves validating the credibility of these concerns and, when necessary, dismissing subjective comments.

Also, I agree with you that there is room for improvement in how the DAO funds projects, especially when assessing the value of the project presented in terms of technology and community gathering. During this last grant, we have implemented the field of impact metrics in the grants request form, as a strategy to be able to measure the value of the program and be able to make better investments as a DAO in the future. We are always gathering input and making adjustments with the objective of making a better grants program.

Best regards,

Hi everyone,

Thank you so much for your inputs during this votation period. Your comments are really valuable for us, and helps us shape our work to serve the community based on its needs and concerns.

Our team has thoroughly read your comments, and we are working on a new version of the proposal that takes into account your inputs. The proposal will be published before the end of the week.

Thank you so much,

@yararasita Reduce funds by half! We are all monitoring.

1 Like

Wow! It’s astonishing to see how much @decentraland has adopted censorship and become sensitive in the past year, now mirroring the level of censorship on Facebook. Such a disaster. It’s clear the founders have profited enough to fund their new lifestyles. They say a captain should sink with the ship, not disappear, and return only when it benefits them. In the community’s view, you are not leaders, just a group of inept individuals struggling to make effective decisions in life.


Wow; I can’t believe this didn’t get approved.