Contributor Compensation Budget Team

Team

Dogstoevsky

Eli

Specification

Ability to discretionally approve funding requests in Utopia:

Total Budget

• Up to 75000 USDC
• Up to 75000 $KRAUSE

Restrictions:

• Stewards Team can reject any request from this team.
• Stewards Team can revoke this team’s funding.
• Community can revoke this team’s funding via proposal.

Use of Funds

Pay contributors in a variety of forms (bounties, streams, project funding) without going through the treasury proposal process to reduce the friction getting funding from the treasury.

Maximum 30k USDC and $KRAUSE to be paid out in a single month.

Why?

The Treasury is meant to be a slow and thorough process to ensure safety best practices. This increases the friction of getting funding, which in turn increases the friction to contribute. This is an experiment in moving contributor and project funding to the subDAO level.

Success for this project will mean:

• Reduce risks for the DAO when funding contributors
  • Being able to more generously “offer” streams without being punished by bad actors
• Increase the number of regular contributors on streams (aim for 20 individually streamed contributors within 2 months)
• Decrease the managerial overhead of certain projects to self-allocate funds within themselves using tools like Coordinape
• Leveraging learnings from books like Reinventing Organizations and obligating contributors to give and receive feedback and learn from each other

How will this team operate?

INITIATE

• Contributors still submit a short proposal/CV/request to this team to become eligible to receive funds

COLLECT

• To actually collect funds, all contributors must submit Proof of Work and Peer Feedback at the end of each month with all significant work (eg. main work you did) “vouched for” by someone (who you ask first)

Example: Dog’s PoW for march. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DGjyLXJhh1sCQIis27Xd_w3-ROuRlY-HkY5WF9-bmeg/edit

• If you don’t have proof of work, you don’t collect. This puts the onus on the contributor which is the only way to maintain order and transparency at scale
• Proof of Work proves that the work was done, it does NOT say anything about quality (beyond it being “passable”)

The point of this PoW is not to have a team GATE KEEPING PAYMENTS. It’s simply to ensure that some work was actually done (AKA prevent fraud)

In addition to the Proof of Work, you will need to include Peer Feedback. These peer reviews are a better indicator of qualitative performance

• This is borrowed from Reinventing Organizations
• Example: Peer Reviews for Dog (This is ANONYMOUS BECAUSE I DIDN’T ASK THESE PEOPLE FIRST IF I COULD SHARE THEM, BUT THEY’D HAVE NAMES ATTACHED NORMALLY)

RENEW

Based on Proof of Work and Peer Feedback, a contributor will be eligible to continue their stream.

NOTE: proof of work will be public, peer feedback will be kept between this budget team and the receiver of the feedback.

Larger Vision

We hope to see multiple budget teams emerge, each with their own niche/focus. Contributors and projects can go to the relevant team. This also allows us to run multiple experiments in contributor funding without any risk to the treasury itself, as the risk is localized to specific funding teams. If the contributor cannot receive quick funding from a team, they can submit a proposal through the treasury.