First with respect Planet_X and Sirlupinwatson1 the idea that everyone from the community is going to ‘donate’ their time to enrich large MKR holders for free is simply is unsustainable in the long run.
There are key responsibility authority positions that will need to be paid for “in the long run” that we can’t expect the Maker Foundation to do. In fact I am not even sure they would want to do it, or even if they can do it. Do you want more MKR to be minted or this to be paid from incoming revenues? Frankly I would rather this come out from DAI upfront than minting and selling MKR for DAI after the fact.
Hence Mitote is correct at a minimum we need to establish at least the idea we want a treasury - the details of implementation conditions - to be discussed. How much, who and how it is used - to be determined.
In the loosest sense a person MAY not be required to be treasurer - that we can debate - but all monies should go into and out of a treasury account. Given Maker is paid in DAI I think we need to start accumulating DAI just to even start to test whether we as the community can agree to proposals being presented for acceptance by ‘contractors’ and then paying out when they are complete. IF all financial transactions are on-chain we probably still will want someone at some point who is responsible for giving a ‘treasury report’ periodically this is generally true with respect to Maker Income and Outlays and general business analysis as well as putting up polls on MIPs to accept as proposals to offer, and proposals to be paid. We might not need a full time paid position for this, but we are going to want every position to be at least 2-3 people deep for redundancy, illness, death etc… To train, and have these people available no matter what positions we decide we will still need a treasury.
People are suggesting we shouldn’t take money from the SF income now. I counter with we better start thinking about it now because we are going to need someone to adjust the smart contracts to start putting money away, just to be able to pay for stuff in the future the way we want and why not start now. The only thing DAI is doing is burning MKR - we surely can slow that down 5-10% (at $100M outstanding this is ~.5-1M DAI worth/yr without hurting MKR burn too much to start paying for things via a treasury model which is funded by SF revenue.) This could also act as a kind of emergency fund in case something unexpected comes up (like an IP/Trademark defense lawsuit)
If the community wants to try to run like a charitable organization - feel free but I can tell you right now from experience since MKR holders stand to benefit from any ‘donations’ of time and effort to Maker that over time people will see MKR holders benefiting from their work without pay and eventually they will just ‘go away’. Eventually unless replenished the MKR foundation funds will run out. I have seen this over and over and over again with organizations that depended entirely on ‘donated’ time/work. Honestly if this is going to be the metric then it is our large MKR holders that are going to have to step up and compensate people. In the end this kind of approach will lead to further centralization (which imo is not part of the key 5 goals as I see them written).
So lets try to be real about this and simply move forward. I see absolutely no reason why 5 or 10% of the incoming SF couldn’t be set aside towards the treasury when to start that I’d like to start sooner, but sensitive to Aaron on this (maybe we could do 1-2% of fees Aaron?). As to hiring the first person even part time there should be more than enough from 5-10% and maybe even 1-2% (50-100K DAI/yr) of the SF fees to pay for that and probably some other stuff. We could try to use the treasury to offload some of the stuff the Maker Foundation is currently paying for and get a more transparent view of actual operational costs. We also should be prepared to pay for legal defense of IP/trademarks, etc.