I have a lot of respect for @links and clearly the community has discussed this up until now.
I can see there are operational difficulties with Coordinape, but don’t bDAO need to focus on new talent, as well as rewarding serious L2 contributors?
If L2s circulate mostly among themselves, then through lack of heft GPs will get a smaller reward pot. It’s going to have the same effect as reducing the GP pot and increasing the L2 one. GPs will progress more slowly.
If the real issue is finding GPs to award GIVE to, I feel something like an ideas pool could be a way to find GPs worthy of rewards, and to an extent remove the issue about GPs with low contribution levels. We can surely build Discord bots to look at activity levels, and then refer to Coordinape itself, and key bDAO documentation libraries like Discourse, to see who has made meaningful contribution.
I think we need to give GPs real incentives to make strong contributions, and provide clear contributor pathways so folk see what they need to do.
Hi @chunz, I know it has been a fair amount of time since this season spec, but I am wondering if you can help me with a few questions. As I am one of those that joined the DAO right at the end of Season 4.
Based that a simple majority or 51% voted to “top up” the Grants Committee Budget, does it make sense that this would continue and also extend to all that receive funding from the Grants Committee?
On Draft 2 of the Season 5 Spec, I see:
Governance Solutions Engineers will have the ability to change or replace the Seasonal Specification, subject to forum and/or Snapshot voting in order to implement the BanklessDAO Constitution & Community Handbook
My Questions are:
Is there a difference between GSE (singular) vs Governance Solution Engineers ?
Hi @Sprinklesforwinners - I’m sorry I missed this! My life outside bDAO has been unusually busy and I haven’t been able to keep up as I’d like, and I’ve missed some things. Please accept my apologies, I didn’t mean to ignore you!
Based on my understanding of the language and the intent it conveys, in my own opinion, yes, I think it makes sense that this arrangement should continue and would extend to any unit that receives bDAO funding via the GC. My initial caveats are important because I didn’t develop that language, it was pulled from the previous Spec so the original author may see things differently than I/we do.
When I was writing this, my intent was to convey that the Governance Solution Engineers (GSEs) is the plural form of the singular, Governance Solution Engineer (GSE). I hope this helps.
I think I need more context to answer this one. While I have my own perspectives on the GSE(s) and what took place, I’m not sure what you mean when you say it wasn’t implemented correctly. If you don’t mind elaborating a bit I’d be happy to provide my perspective.