Ways to make an income at BanklessDAO

Hey folks, quick post here. This was inspired by @EliteViking, who has channeled the frustration of many that have put nearly four weeks of time into this project without much consideration as to remuneration.

For the upcoming season, I see three avenues of payment from least to most intensive:

  1. Collecting $BANK bounties
  2. Generate revenue for the DAO (podcasts, newsletters, sponsorships)
  3. Coordinape (payroll management)

Collecting Bank Bounties

  • Guilds/project submit bounties with $BANK as reward
  • Good for people that only have a few hours a week to contribute

Generate Revenue for the DAO

  • More entrepreneurial endeavor
  • DAO members create content and plug into BanklessDAO network. Sponsorships/partnership $ gets split between the members of the content team and DAO (split TBD)
  • Content team can distribute their share amongst themselves


  • Coordinape is a decentralized payroll management tool that was spun out of Yearn Finance and their DAO
  • Members are given 100 tokens to distribute. Each token represents a share of a shared salary pool. Members allocate tokens to the peers they have worked most closely with.
  • After a set amount of time, tokens are summed and members receive a proportional share of the salary pool
  • (As a possible method to identify who gets tokens, perhaps anyone that is listed as a project contributor/coordinator here)
  • (We can also do a retroactive salary allocation at the beginning of Season 1 to pay people for their contributions thus far)
  • More on Coordinape here and here

I know this system is far from perfect, but this is the quickest way I can think of to start giving back to everyone that has already given to the DAO. We can also adjust as we learn throughout the seasons.


Thanks for your post, as usual goes straight to the point.

The “three avenues of payment” correctly defines different kind of engagement, but some of them should not be compatible.

While Bounties+B2B and B2B+Salary can work. Bounties+Salary should be excluded.

Salary receivers should be precisely defined (in order to avoid conflicts with community and overlaps)


Thank you Frog.

At least this is a system. The system might not be perfect but there is not a perfect system.
It can always be changed in the future if needed.


I agree with this. I also think Grendel is right.

I’m willing to put this effort at the top of my priority list so that we can get our members taken care of, We’ve put in enough time to know who’s passed the internship stage I’d say.

I would like to implement Coordinape with Contributors being the criteria for receiving Salary (I’d try to set it so they can opt out if they prefer bounties though) We have a month down, so it makes sense to me to vote at the end of the month on the previous month. That would mean Execution should be around 6/4 for Ideal timeline.
With Snapshots planned for Tues, It could be passed on the 4th and implemented same day. (or a week following, but the team would know it’s on the way and alleviate stress)

The amount is always going to be the tricky part, but I propose as follows:

The first month is going to likely be a stand alone value, as by month 2 we may be ready for a more mature system.

Budget: 24 M Bank
Current Contributors eligible for remuneration: 36
Voting weights:
level 1: 100 tokens
level 2: 500 tokens
Voting period: 1 week

Assuming the average member would need at least $4000/Mo, and that the value of bank remains at $.03
Also Ignoring slippage due to low liquidity
That gives us a calculation of
4000 x 5 x .03 = 666,666 Bank/ Contributor
x 36 Contributors = Appx 24M Bank
Obviously that number is too high to be sustainable, but I am of the opinion that those who have contributed thus far have built the foundation upon which the rest of the Dao is going to stand or fall, and they have earned the potential upside if they hold their tokens. For month 2, all numbers should be revisited. However, with current treasury holdings, We could continue at this expenditure rate for about 6 months, and that should be plenty of time for us to molt into a less larval form of remuneration.

Yellow tag contributions shouldn’t be forgotten, but IMO will be in the scope of the Bank bounties (managed by the guilds)


Coming from someone who has been happy to contribute as a means of scaffolding for greater payout in some foreseeable future, I think @AboveAverageJoe’s suggestion is both timely and generous. I agree with all of the above, but this is def a good start. My question is, what constitutes a level 2 contributor? What about the Level 1s (ahem, myself and others) who have been involved, active, and building alongside the “contributors”?


I agree with this and as a temporary measure due to BANK held in the treasury. As you suggest let’s revisit this next month.

1 Like

@nonsensetwice I would like to see this addressed as well. I really feel that the longer we go without addressing it the harder it’s going to be to correct.


I’m wrapping my head around the figures you guys have so graciously provided. I know it is needed, I’m looking forward to the DAO giving back to the contributors who have helped make this successful.

1 Like

I understand why the people who have put the most time and effort into the DAO and made the foundations should get rewarded, and the amounts suggested by @AboveAverageJoe seem totally reasonable for the first month, some people here have been whole heartedly and whole brain-ly into getting this DAO off the ground and they deserve appreciation and support.

However, I don’t see this being a sustainable way of compensating people for their work going forward, in the sense it is based on a status that isn’t really formal yet (how can one become a contributor, and within this level 1 or 2 what makes the difference, how to make sure bonds, preferences, friendships, games of influence that will necessarily develop with time won’t get in the middle of that), and it is independent of the underlying projects (so far if I didn’t miss anything the idea has been “if you have an idea, a project, go for it, don’t wait for approval, get things done” which is a great way to start and we should definitely keep this spirit for a bit longer). But the DAO will have to start arbitraging/deciding which contribution must have remuneration otherwise it might push some people to work and spend time on projects not necessarily useful or having value just to get the remuneration, which could be parasitic.


Love the discussion around this. I think getting core contributors paid should be a priority and Coordinape is awesome from what I’ve seen. Generally for new initiatives, I’m in favor of starting simple and small (it’s much easier to scale up than down). With that said, I’m curious how you got those numbers @AboveAverageJoe?

$4,000 in BANK at $0.03 would mean an average of 133,333 BANK per contributor ($4,000 / $0.03). Multiply that by 36 and its ~4.8M BANK in total to fund this initiative. This allocation seems a lot more sustainable right now rather than the 24M BANK originally proposed and the 11.1M being discussed (and we’re still giving contributors meaningful rewards!).

The other thing I would like to highlight is that we should be cautious of paying contributors with solely BANK as it will likely result in sell pressure given people need to pay for expenses (rent, food, etc.) In the future once we’re passed this bootstrapping phase, we can ideally start paying out contributors in USDC/DAI (with BANK bonuses).

Right now, there’s very thin liquidity on the market so there’s not much to support any additional selling if we were to distribute millions of BANK. With that said, since we’re still in this bootstrapping phase and there’s very thin liquidity on the market, I’d be more in favor of this proposal if there was a 6 month or 1 year vesting period for the recipients. This would curb any sell pressure while aligning the contributor for the long term (and also getting people some BANK for their work).

My two gwei :slight_smile:


I’d be okay with a 4 month vesting schedule. 6-12 month seems extreme for how quickly DAOs move.


That’s fair - I think it would ultimately depend on what the final allocation is.

More BANK = longer vesting period
Less BANK = shorter vesting period


It was half baked, there was a x5 that I put in there and didn’t fully flesh out a 1/5 max disparity between top and bottom receivers. Honestly, the 24M was clickbait to get the convo started.
The 24m was the easiest thing ever to let go of.

I totally agree with sell pressure concerns, and that’s why we’ve started this with the intent that it’s a one time event. If I were to sell my stack, I’d drop the price of Bank by 20%, so I’m no stranger to the illiquidity we face here.
I’m also for vesting.
When I made this thing, I knew it would look way different (and better) with more brainpower. I just wanted to create something to nucleate upon. Mission accomplished =]


Just as a heads up Coordinape doesn’t currently have a way to facilitate vesting.

I know someone has reached out to Trach with Coordinape and I’m sure he’s communicated that, but I just wanted to make sure everyone was operating with the same level of information


Vesting is a solution for not having the value of the Bank reduced. But it prevents the contributor from being able to use his BANKs to obtain other incomes. example Bank / WETH on Sushiswap.


Moving to #archive

Please reply if you’d like to keep it open

You know, digital marketing was actually created to solve your business issues. If offline marketing is limited to the location, digital marketing is not limited at all. That’s why you have 8 billion potential clients now