What I like about this MIP
The motivation behind this MIP
We agree that an MKR Compensation Plan is central to the survival of the DAO by attracting, retaining, and aligning talent to the MKR voters.
The work of these two Contributors
@LongForWisdom and @AES’ work cannot be overstated. These two contributors have done a vast amount of work for the DAO in numerous ways, and we cannot thank them enough. I also think they both know that I enjoy working with them, and I intend to keep doing so in the future, hopefully for a long time.
Financial Implications and Scenario Analysis
This is great. We need more of this. Some of us believe that we need a dedicated Core Unit to build more of these. And @AES has probably all the right skills to do this. (I’m not saying he should do it, but he probably should do it ). We need much more visibility on the financials of the DAO—definitely my favourite part of the fundamental research to build this MIP.
It keeps the conversation going
This conversation started some time ago, and a lot of people have contributed with their brains. I believe that it is a crucial topic central to the future development of the DAO.
Where I think this MIP falls short
It feels rushed
It went from discussion to MIP in seven days. Is there a specific reason for this?
It is unclear on what MKR holders are voting
If the numbers are illustrative, are we voting on the ratios? Or are we voting on the definition of the primary domains? Or we’re voting in the Dai denominated compensation?
We all agree that we need some guidelines, which might be a step in the right direction. However…
Guidelines to help Facilitators
The idea of having guidelines (or at least @SES-Core-Unit’s view) is to remove hurdles for the teams to focus on what they should be doing: providing value for the DAO.
Contributors (including a potential Facilitator with 2+ years of Maker knowledge) have already raised questions about how to proceed with these guidelines.
What happens if…
…my team is composed of an army of interns and entry-level contributors?
…my team is composed of senior superstars?
…my team is composed of Contributors spanning multiple domains?
Contributors Specific Situation
…a person in my team will contribute part-time?
…a person in my team wants to contribute more and switch to full-time?
… the price of MKR tanks? The package will become less competitive. At which percentage or change is this reviewed? Or is it every three months? Or six months? Who is going to review it?
…the price of MKR skyrockets? Are we going to be handing super-competitive out-of-market packages? Will the MKR holders agree to that?
There are topics that might lead to huge disparities within the same Core Unit, let alone across the DAO. Should not a set of guidelines address these questions to serve the current and future teams?
Ignores the conversation
As much as I think this discussion is necessary, I am disappointed that it has completely ignored all the points raised in the SES proposal.
We intended to design guidelines to help teams while trying to solve potential edge cases. Here is the post, in case that someone missed it.
No feedback from current Facilitators or Contributors
This point might be wrong, as I have not spoken to every Facilitator or Contributor (with or without MKR Compensation in place). I have talked to a few, and no one seems to have been consulted to draft this MIP (except for @LongForWisdom, of course).
Snapshot of your vision for the DAO
While a lot of people will agree with your ratios, some might not. Worse, not every voter might infer that fixing the MKR Compensation in a certain way shapes the vision of how the DAO should be shaped.
@wouter has already articulated this idea, so I won’t make this post unnecessarily longer by repeating it.
While I agree with the motivation behind the MIP and some of the guiding principles, I feel that it falls short of its noble intention.