Editing Publishing Arm Season 3 Budget Proposal

EPA Season 3 Budget Proposal

Program Champions

Frank America#0610, SamanthaJ#8487, Ap0llo#5781, hirokennelly.eth :black_flag:#0001

Program Name:

The Writers Guild Editorial and Publishing Arm (EPA) & Client Services (CS)

Multisig Address:


Program Justification:

The EPA successfully applied for and received a grant during Season 2. That proposal can be viewed here. This is a grant proposal for Season 3, which aims to discuss the value provided by this project and outline a roadmap for complete self-sustainability by Season 6. The Editing and Publishing Arm (EPA) of the Writers Guild has grown and gelled during Season 2. This proposal discusses where the project is today and what it’s doing to achieve self-preservation tomorrow.

The EPA delivers value to the BanklessDAO in three primary ways:

  1. Onboarding new writing and editing talent to the Writers Guild.
  2. Up-skilling authors and editors to generate cross-guild and multi-genre content.
  3. Publishing BanklessDAO voices who deliver educational Web3-oriented value currently through channels such as Medium, Mirror, and Twitter.

In Season 2, the EPA onboarded 18 new editors, published 17 EPA-funded articles as of this posting, and decentralized its workflow with a custom designed editing assignment bot.

The EPA, with support of the Writers Guild Talent Scout, administered numerous writing and editing tests, which are clearance hurdles for Newsletter and Client Services. In S3, these writing and editing tests will require original unpublished work tailored specifically for their project destination, e.g., a news-style piece or a CS-style piece, respectively.

The EPA enjoys serving as a talent funnel for both Newsletter and Client Services, both of which are revenue-generating entities, and hopes to continue to serve the Writers Guild by fostering a deep pool of talent. The EPA is to the Writers Guild as the Balancer liquidity pool is to BANK—our “liquidity” of writers and editors grows every week.

As far as our publishing platforms, there are no clearance hurdles for authors (whether guests, L1s, or L2s) to submit to the EPA for publication, and we aim to work with and support a variety of writing so long as it maintains a Web3 oriented perspective. Five published pieces that demonstrate a range of voice and topic are Tokenomics 101: Terra Ecosystem, Life Imitates Art: Future Applications of NFTs, How To Set Up A Meta-Mask Wallet, Crypto Interest on Rise in Nigeria, and 7 Take Aways After 1 Month of Contributing to a DAO.

While the EPA has been focused on editing and publishing Web3-oriented voices, a separate project, Client Services, has been authoring and collaborating with external entities, bringing in profit to the DAO. The EPA is effectively an integral not-for-profit educational platform for the BanklessDAO. Client Services is a blue-chip article-publishing machine that only works with Web3-steeped, forward-thinking brands that pay well. We believe these two operations within the Writers Guild umbrella could collaborate well together. As a test run in Season 3, the EPA will supply additional bandwidth to expand Client Services’ operations, and in return Client Services will delegate a percentage of profits to the EPA multi-sig rather than the Writers Guild multi-sig, where funds were directed in Season 2.

A close approximation of funds earned by Client Services in S2 and the splits.

New Horizons

Season 3 for the EPA will be centered around growth-strategy (new Client Services partnership, increasing Mirror NFT publications, heightening visual/image-based relevance, and shipping twice-weekly), quality-control (mentoring authors and offering up-skilling resources, providing robust assistance and an increased demand for quality editing), and talent-acquisition (collaboration with the Writers Guild Talent Scout Office to bring in fresh talent, as well as outreach via creative writing contests and inter-guild collaborations, such as with the Design and Marketing guilds).

Growth Strategy: Client Services Integration with the EPA

Client Services is a Writing and Editing Services project developed and managed by Frank America. The CS writers and editors are pulled primarily from the EPA’s pool, and they delivered numerous articles to high-profile crypto-native clients. Of that income, 10% cycled back into the BanklessDAO Treasury, 10% to the Writers Guild Multi-Sig, and 10% to Frank America for quarterbacking projects and building the brand. Flagship clients during that time included Ledger via BanklessHQ (Ultimate Ledger Guide), Perpetual Protocol, and MakerDAO.

Client Services delivers value to the BanklessDAO in four primary ways:

  1. Interfacing with external brands as ambassadors for the BanklessDAO.
  2. Compensating authors well to strengthen the stickiness of DAO participation.
  3. Recycling revenue back into the BanklessDAO Treasury and the Writer’s Guild.
  4. Brand-building for the DAO as a whole when the Bankless name is paired with big players like Maker and Ledger.

In the spirit of economic expansion and deepening collaboration, and influenced in part from the talent pool and publishing platforms of the EPA that are leveraged to achieve Client Services’ goals, CS proposes to redirect the 10% allocation, previously assigned to Writers Guild Treasury in Season 2, to the EPA Treasury in Season 3.

This is the beginning of a collaboration that will assist the EPA towards self-sustainability. However, the EPA as a tool that assists new voices and onboards members is an invaluable asset that cannot be understated, and doesn’t directly correlate with profitability. The EPA will aim for increased profitability season over season, with a goal to be self-sustaining by Season 6, but we need runway to do so.

Client Services will continue to maintain its own Kanban board, publishing flow, onboarding style, talent assignment, and client discretion. The EPA will continue to focus on publishing a range of voices, onboarding talent, and up-skilling authors and editors. However, both will coordinate in S3 to increase revenue in new ways, improve BanklessDAO brand recognition, and deliver content in an educationally profitable way.

Growth Strategy: Historical Mirror Publications & On-Brand Outreach

Slated for Season 3 is an initiative to tell the BanklessDAO’s history through our Mirror page. This chronicle of the history of the birth of a-synchronous decentralized organizations, minted as limited edition NFTs on Mirror, will serve as a growing independent revenue stream which we will use to partially remunerate writers and editors in Season 4.

We’re also on a mission to get our writers published in “big name” publications, like CoinDesk, Telegraph, and Decrypt. Further growth targets include pitching publications that non-crypto-natives read—everything from Wall Street Journal to New York Times to The New Yorker. We know that, with our work ethic, talent pool, and strong brand name, we can turn the EPA into more than just a voice of the DAO—it will become a voice throughout DAOs, across the crypto-community, and beyond. We will reach people just finding their way into Web3, thus furthering the DAO’s mission. Bridging the gap between crypto readers and non-crypto-native readers is a primary target as we hone focus and harness growth.

Growth Strategy: Improve Visual Identity and Cross-Guild Collaboration

In partnership with the Design Guild, we’ve increased the visual integrity of our publications. Custom-dialing visual assets such as cover designs and in-article graphics will only expand the relevance of our written material. In both Season 2, and even more so in Season 3, we have budgeted for this necessity. The importance of plugging into the visual side of our articles cannot be understated, so we are committed to scaling our partnership with in-house bDAO designers.

A final component to our growth strategy is to collaborate with the Marketing Guild to get more viewership on our articles. Although we can supply basic social media communications and target influences, we believe empowering another guild to assist in spreading awareness may be a further unlock to the expansion of our brand imprint and educational outreach.

For these reasons, we’ve included in this budget proposal an amount of BANK to pay out both designers and marketers. While Client Services is scaling up and Mirror-minted NFTs are on the horizon, we request funding for the DAO-wide services we provide: Education, Onboarding, and Upleveling.

Although we expect to increase revenue with the support of our EPA writers and editors, it is important that we don’t confuse the difference between writing high quality pay-per-word articles with varying levels of technical prerequisites, and serving as a sounding board and fog horn for the voice of the BanklessDAO. We are committed to providing a platform for all voices and all levels of skill under the umbrella of this mission of going bankless.

Quality Control: Mentoring Authors & Upskilling Opportunities

The EPA aims to increase the quality of its publications, and this begins with enhancing the skillset of our authors and editors. During Season 2, we’ve provided 1-on-1 editing sessions and suggested reading materials. Season 3 will bring more emphasis and focus on good content editing, author-editor collaboration, and upskilling writers who have an on-brand message but perhaps not a developed writing style just yet. We also plan to introduce EPA Coordinator office hours, where writers and editors will get to talk through tough pieces synchronously with our project coordinator. S3 is designed to level-up our squad and the quality of material that gets printed.

Talent Acquisition: Collaboration with Talent Scout & Writing Contests

The EPA will continue to assist with onboarding talent both for publication, and for fulfilling authorial roles in Client Services and Newsletter. Custom original content will be required to pass the Writing Test (used to evaluate writers for Client Services) given by the Talent Scout of the Writers Guild. The Talent Scout will then collaborate with the EPA to help place and educate writers and editors. Furthermore, Creative Writing Contests and campaigns to get BanklessDAO materials into other significant publications will continue to provide onramps for the writers of Web3 to join BanklessDAO.

Program Terms

In order to successfully fulfill the tasks of this program, we’ll need funds to compensate editors and writers for their efforts with articles, as well as five roles to facilitate this overall process: Coordination (Samanthaj), Accounting (ap0llo), Scheduling and Publishing (Frank America and hirokennelly.eth), and Client Services management (Frank America).

The responsibilities of these roles will be:

  • Creating, building, and maintaining collaborative and productive relationships between editors, writers, and designers
  • Gauging submissions for alignment with the mission, vision, and values of BanklessDAO
  • Reviewing submissions to ensure quality and consistency of content and facilitating edits or rewrites if necessary
  • Selecting articles for publication and deciding which platform (Medium, Mirror)
  • Updating and maintaining the content publishing calendar and the Editing Work spreadsheet
  • Scheduling articles for publication in a timely manner from completion date
  • Working with designers to generate covers for articles to improve branding and increase reach of content
  • Working closely with the Marketing Guild to provide exposure for publications on social media
  • Collaborating with the WG Talent Scout Office to onboard new editors and writers by administering an editing or writing test, which evaluates the skill set of each new contributor
  • Starting a Mirror bDAO history initiative with incredibly high quality articles that rely heavily on visual information
  • Providing remuneration to editors, writers, and designers at regular intervals
  • Providing regular budget analyses and updates to ensure seamless payments to editors, writers, and designers


This is the current workflow for publishing an article:

  1. A writer submits an article via the BanklessDAO Submission form or adds it manually to our spreadsheet.

  2. Our new Editing Work spreadsheet has automated a significant number of the project management tasks, which previously required an entire role within the EPA. Now, articles move along our workflow without intervention from a third party.

  3. Content Editors, in Stage 1, determine if the article is fit to be published to BanklessDAO channels. If so, the article moves on to Stage 2. If not, the editor returns the article to the author.

  4. In Stage 2, the Content Editor takes a deep dive into editing the article, working through 1. the Editing Framework established at the inception of the Writers Guild. Any changes that need to be made to the Framework are made as suggestions within the weekly Editors meeting and ratified by the editing team at large.

  5. Upon completion of Stage 2, the editor returns the article to the author for review. If the author accepts and implements the edits, the editor moves the article to Stage 4. If the author does not, the editor removes the article from the queue altogether.

  6. In Stage 4, a Copy Editor reviews the article, making sure the writer implemented the original edits, and makes a final review for quality control.

  7. Once the Copy Editor approves the article for publishing, the team determines the appropriate channel for publication and places it on the content calendar for that channel.

  8. Prep article for publication and schedule.

  9. Authors and editors get paid the first week of the following month.


To accomplish all the terms of the program, we recommend the following payouts for each individual:


2 BANK per word, with a cap of 3000 BANK per published author.

*EPA reserves the right to not publish articles if they do not fit brand standards as mentioned above or do not progress according to satisfaction if in development. Kill fee of 250 BANK applies for Primary Editors who work on pieces that do not make it past Stage 1, so that no work goes unremunerated.

Primary Editors:

2000 BANK for heavy edits.

1500 BANK for moderate editing.

1000 BANK for minor editing.

The editor determines the level of difficulty in processing articles. This system may be revised in the future if we become aware of abuse.

Secondary Editors:

500 BANK for secondary review

Design, Marketing, and Layout

1,000 BANK bounty per cover design. 1,000 BANK bounty per article for marketing support from the marketing guild. 1,000 BANK for layout, which is our final quality control step that often requires a final edit, interfacing with designers and marketers, and coordinating with the author to publish the piece. This multi-part step includes:

  • Procuring custom cover art working closely with over half a dozen designers
  • Running final fine-tooth comb edits
  • Onboarding author to medium or mirror
  • Changing Article titles and crafting detailed SEO friendly subtitles
  • Interfacing with author for clarity and approval of changes
  • Polishing formatting, and adding consistent layout in relation to other articles
  • Request re-writes in the case of vague sections
  • Image descriptions for the visually impaired
  • Craft and post on twitter and hyperlink to author for credit
  • Share and distribute articles in BanklessDAO WG
  • Remunerate marketing assistance from the Marketing Guild

Role Definition(s) for Season 3

ROLES (Payouts are nominal and not reflective of total hours worked.)

Coordination - SamanthaJ

Editors’ Circle Organizer

Organizing and facilitating weekly Editors Circle meetings, which includes preparing agenda, sending out notifications, checking in with writers and editors, and managing the distribution of POAPs. Working with WG members to establish the direction of the EPA and coordinate with other WG entities, such as the Newsletter arm and the WG Twitter squad. Developing and shepherding a governance framework that fits the unique needs of the EPA and CS project.

Season 3 Remuneration: This amounts to 13 weeks of work, per a standard season, at 2000 BANK/week for a total of 26,000 BANK.

Accounting/Secretary - Ap0ll0517

EPA secretarial role which involves taking notes at meetings, logging payments, retrieving wallet addresses, and formatting .csv files to execute multi-sig transactions. Managing scope and budget of EPA and offering insight into financial status.

Season 3 Remuneration: This amounts to 13 weeks of work, per a standard season, at 2000 BANK/week for a total of 26,000 BANK.

Scheduling and Publishing - Frank America

Managing content calendar and publishing decisions, considering how pieces fold together and building out a publishing flow to reflect that, managing or implementing final design actions, providing editorial insight to authors and editors on articles. Overall growth strategy, author/editor development, and technical publishing support (mirror NFTs, Web3 publishing, splits, mints, etc.).

Season 3 Remuneration: This role amounts to 13 weeks of work each, per a standard season, at 2000 BANK/week for a total of 26,000 BANK

Design and Marketing - Hirokennelly

Contact authors and editors regarding status of submitted articles to ensure a steady flow of content for publication. Review articles after secondary edits for quality. When ready for publication, commission article covers and work through iterative drafts with designers to hone in the message of the covers to convey the essence of a piece. Collaborate with Marketing Guild to outline and execute a comprehensive strategy that increases the reach and impact of our published content.

Season 3 Remuneration: This role amounts to 13 weeks of work each, per a standard season, at 2000 BANK/week for a total of 26,000 BANK

Client Services Management - Frank America

Frank manages the Client Services arm, which requires interfacing with clients, selecting authors and editors, following up with authors and editors to ensure everyone’s on schedule, and doing editing and writing on an as-needed-basis to keep quality high.

Season 3 Remuneration: This amounts to 13 weeks of work, per a standard season, at 2000 BANK/week for a total of 26,000 BANK.

Projected Compensation:

We expect to publish 30 articles in Season 3, split between Medium and our new Mirror initiative.

3,000 (per author) + 2,000 (per content editor) + 500 (per copy editor) + 1000 (per cover design) + 1,000 (per marketing bounty) + 1,000 (final layout) x 30 = 255,000

250 BANK “kill fee” for editors who work on pieces that do not make it to publication. 20 “kill fees” are built into the Content Editors category. = 5,000 BANK

5 Roles at 26,000 BANK =130,000 BANK


Authors Content Editors Copy Editors Cover Design Bounties Marketing Bounties Shipping and Handling EPA Role Holders TOTAL
90,000 65,000 15,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 130,000 390,000


The EPA had a successful Season 2 and is excited to continue building new talent and finding more revenue streams for the BanklessDAO. We are excited to expand, innovate, and deliver. Thank you for your consideration.

  • Yes, fund it
  • No, needs edits

0 voters

The EPA put a lot of time and energy into mapping this proposal. EPA has been hustling on muscle for the first 1.5 seasons, and is finally catching stride! This proposal will line us up for success to continue to spread the voice of the dao, and serve and interact with other web3 forward entities.

1 Like

Very cool to see Client Services support the EPA! Makes a lot of sense to me.

Great proposal! 3 questions:

  • Who does the shipping and handling? Is it individual editors or role holders?
  • Will Frank America continue to take 10% of EPA revenue now that he is drawing a salary for that work?
  • The budget is quite a bump from season 2. Do you have goals around the impact you’d like to achieve for the bumped budget? What are your KPIs?

Another question: feels like the EPA is a vital and permanent fixture of the Writers Guild…why not include this in seasonal guild funding?


I appreciate the huge amount of work the champions have put in here - the proposal certainly does a great job at distilliing EPA discussion and ideas for future success. Thank you.

I recognise most of what’s in this proposal from the discussions we’ve had at EPA meetings.
The parts I am concerned about are the changes to primary editor remuneration and the lack of a vote for role-holders prior to naming them in the proposal.

The named role holders are all outstanding people and logical choices for the roles, but I don’t think anybody should be named on the budget proposal before the EPA members have had a chance to vote.

Similarly, I don’t necessarily object to the change in editing amounts but I thought the discussion we had about that earlier this season was very much still in progress. I have not heard it discussed in recent weeks.

For the workflow, I would like to see all article submssions done via the form rather than manual addition to the sheet. We have recently discussed the fact that this makes for a natural queue and also gives us a chance to implement a pre-assessment if warranted down the track.

Also, and this is picky… but workflow steps 3-7 seem to still be reflecting the KanBan Board workflow, not the new spreadsheet.


Very good question, which we should’ve specified in the proposal! The DAO is moving toward project rather than guild funding as a whole, which is why we made this decision (with the help + consultation of frog). The WG multisig is used to pay WG role holders and a couple bounties only, while the newsletter multisig and EPA multisigs will remain separate. This is a good way for us to distinguish projects, “blurry” roles, and profitability. For example, the newsletter team is profitable, but the EPA is not, so we wanted to keep everything separate.

I’m going to answer your other questions very soon!

Good questions, here’s what I’ve got for ya:

Role holders: I brought this up in our WG weekly, and it was decided that projects should determine role holders internally. When nonsense decided to step down, he asked if I’d be willing to step up in his place, then gave me some education on how to do the job. The other roles existed but were not remunerated (hiro) or under-remunerated (frank). So, that’s likely why it looks like we invented a bunch of new ones—they just weren’t being paid last season, doing lots of pro bono work for the EPA. Last season was like a “test” season for the EPA, as it was our first one, so it feels like in this one we can really hammer out governance. I’d love to talk EPA-specific governance and set clear voting expectations next season. (let me know if this didn’t answer your question, I know there’s lots of gray area)

Editing amounts: There was significant abuse happening in the system, so we had to change this. Frank and Hiro did endless last-minute edits for us, and we had many concerns about people picking up this “easy BANK.” We’re going to revisit this in S3. I know the final decision turned out pretty siloed, but it was made out of respect for role holders’ time (we’re going to do some big editing overhauls in S3) and the EPA’s wallet (so we can have more BANK to fund Mirror writing, design bounties, marketing bounties, and more).

Workflow: This is something else we will revisit internally in S3, but as this is the current workflow, we included that. The only issue with the google form is that someone has to manually transfer all those entries and it bottlenecks the process, so I don’t think we’re 100% ready to get rid of spreadsheet entries…but again, this is something we should chat about in S3. I’m very open and excited to continue improving our workflow!

Thank you for the questions and feel free to DM me if you’d like to dive deeper on anything!

Answers for ya:

Shipping and handling: We changed that to a final “layout” stage and adjusted the BANK amount, so give that a re-read! That will be mostly run by Hiro and Frank but I’d like to explore the potential of bountying-out that to a few trusted EPA members who we can give access to Medium and Mirror. (long story short: there’s way more last-minute behind-the-scenes stuff that we weren’t remunerating in S2, and this is one of those. I’m very open to ideas of how to build in a bounty for that…but again, it requires Medium access and a good “final edit” so it can’t be bountied out to just anyone…a hard but important topic to explore.)

Frank payment: Yes, he’s taking 10% of CS cut still as he often does secondary edits and the entire “end of stage” steps on his own to keep quality high. We’re going to explore ways to bring more people onto Frank’s team in S3 because CS is our revenue-generating arm and we want to ramp that up so we can have net profit and no grants funding by S6, about 9 months from now.

Budget bump: Yes! It is. That is because 1. we built in marketing and design bounties, so a large chunk (60,000) is flowing to other guilds, 2. the EPA is ramping up publishing because we recognize that it’s a great way for members to earn BANK to get up to the 35k threshold, 3. I’m starting a Mirror initiative to get some NFTs minted to bring in revenue, and 4. we had lots of un-remunerated work happening in S2 (Hiro and Frank) so the old budget did not properly reflect the amount of work we did.

number of CS revenue and clients coming in
number of views/reads on Medium/Mirror
number of new members and new clients who find our DAO through our publishing channels
revenue generated by Mirror NFTs
number of “external” publications we can get in (coindesk, decrypt, non-crypto-native places)
number of EPA members reaching L1
net profit coming in through CS and NFTs so we can better roadmap a path to self-sustainability

As always, DM me for more!

@samanthaj @Trewkat

Admittedly, I’ve read the comments more than the original proposal, but I would +1 Trewkat’s point about having a say in governance and role holder decisions. As Trewkat implied, the role holders all make sense, but in the spirit of community ownership and distributed power, EPA members should have a say in who gets to hold these roles, even if it is a simple “signalling” vote.

Also, would very much like the EPA to plug into the Sponsorship program and perhaps draw revenue by advertising on Medium.


That makes sense, I agree about it’s important to get votes and buy-in, but since projects under the WG didn’t have that set up, I thought it was out of place to spin up a new gov process last second. I must’ve misinterpreted the convo in the WG weekly about elections— I should’ve been much more clear that I was asking about voting for project elections!

1 Like

Slated for S3 under my role! Thanks for the great convo today @Trewkat and @jakeandstake and others, and thanks for the comments @frogmonkee


Albeit a bit late, we’ve drafted a poll and posted it in writers-poll. S3 will be about firming up governance processes and making these processes more straightforward. If it doesn’t pass by our WG Meeting on Monday, EPA will re-assess and re-configure as necessary for group approval.

I’d like to make a few points about this. First, we are only budgeting for 1 article per week. But we have more members now than ever. Wouldn’t it make sense to have some spare capacity in the budget?

After all, if numerous people are joining but only 30 people are able to write, then how are we actually engaging new members? Keeping in mind as well that in the governance meetings, we are talking about assigning guild roles, such as scribe, etc.

To be an active member of WG, we will all need to do a minimum of 4 activities per season. This is going to mean that active, current members are going to be taking up the fair share of available tasks, just as we currently are. But this is not taking into consideration the additional capacity we should be making available as our guild membership increases.

My second point is that considering the number of people we now have in the DAO and the active members we have in guilds, I don’t see a reason why any person should have 2 or more roles within any single project or any coordination team. I understand that there are OGs who have pioneered projects in the past, and they deserve their credit. But from next season onwards, we should be focusing more on distributing roles more evenly and fairly.

Another issue is that I don’t recall seeing a vote for those roles, so I’m not quite sure what the process was to decide these people for the roles. One thing that I find a bit concerning, though, is that when I look at guild coordinators and project coordinators, I’m seeing the same names coming up - it’s not only in this guild, but in others too. I hope to see all guilds and projects become less centralised over the next season.

1 Like

I would very much +1 this. I didn’t see notice the repeat role holders that overlap with WG roles as well. Not saying that it’s bad, but should plan for eventual phasing out and letting newcomers take the reigns. I think lazy consensus, apprentices, and voting allow for this, but we should also be mindful of a social culture of uplifts newcomers and not consolidate around existing ones.

I appreciate the answers to my questions, and in general support this effort wholeheartedly. I agree with the proposal authors that the EPA is a vital piece of our outreach strategy - a key piece of the puzzle onboard 1B to a bankless life.

That being said, I’ve had some lingering thoughts I’d like to share with you on how I believe this proposal could be strengthened, taking into account some of the pushback in the comments and on Discord.

I think the biggest criticism is the perception that the proposal is centralizing the EPA around certain individuals. It’s a difficult balance to retain talented contributors to help us grow as an organization (often unpaid), while at the time growing new contributors to be equally talented in the future. I think this proposal leans more towards the former than the latter, but if we TRULY want to be a force in the media world, we need to set ourselves up to continually improve. I don’t think this proposal does enough in that direction.

Here are some suggestions to help us fly:

  • In general, focus EPA building growing the machine that allows us to consistently ship high-quality media. Everything (including revenue) should be second to growing our talent and processes.
  • Related to the above…move client services to its own proposal with the following roles:
    • Client Services Coordinator (Frank America) - x hours a week at the standard rate. There’s no DAO-wide definition of a coordinator role (there should be), but every project needs one. This role would additionally be responsible for onboarding more of the next role.
    • Client Services Sales/Accounts (anyone) - 10% of the cut of revenue they bring in. THIS should be the person who is interfacing with clients and ensuring their needs are filled. I don’t think there should be an expectation they are doing final edits or anything - the EPA’s quality process should ensure equally high quality for clients AND our own pages. By opening up this role to more people, you create incentive for people to find more revenue for the DAO, the EPA, our talent (writers, editors, designers, marketers), and themselves.
  • Have the Acounting/Secretary role filled by someone other than Ap0ll0517. If you’re ever spoken to me about DAO-wide accounting, you’ll know I think Ap0ll0 is best-in-class. For that reason, I think it’s of critical importance to seed his methods to more people. The EPA Accountant/Secretary could answer to the WG Secretary (Ap0ll0), learn his practice, and make the DAO more resilient as a result. Even better if this role was rotated - more people learning what it is that makes Ap0ll0 effective.
  • Separate the Scheduling and Publishing role into two roles (Publishing and Editorial). The scope of this role is laughably massive - 2 hours a week to handle all publishing logistics AND figure out a way to grow authors/editors? I don’t believe this is possible. One would expect the EPA Coordinator to handle editorial direction and talent growth, but if that’s not possible, then I suggest creating another role or else all you’re doing is setting this person up to fail.
  • Think about how to reduce the Shipping and Handling burden rather than “dealing with it” with a role.
    • You could turn part of it into bounties that Design/Marketing and Scheduling/Publishing use to train more people. i.e. we need a design for this article - hey guest pass holder, here’s 300 BANK to coordinate with the Design Guild to make it happen
    • Codify “final edit” into a part of the EPA process, so that we can consistently ensure high-quality articles as an org (rather than have Hiro and Frank fill in the gaps). If editors aren’t getting the job done, you NEED a mechanism to give them feedback, otherwise you’re wallpapering the problem rather than fixing it. I suggest another stage before publishing which has the option to “kill” an article, and potentially remove remuneration for editors who aren’t getting us to the quality we need. I actually think this could be done by the Editorial role I mentioned above (or a group of trusted editors)
  • Have a vote on EPA proposals within the Writers Guild before you put them on Discourse. If you can’t gain consensus within the WG, then there’s no point bringing this the greater DAO.

There’s a lot more I can say, but that’s a lot to digest already. Feel free to reach out if you’d like to talk about it!

1 Like