How about concrete or data driven arguments please? or maybe proposal on how to make the things better without giving power to the management board?
1 Like
Hi everyone,
I have recently discovered the project and invested into it so please take this message as a way for you to understand how recent community member are seeing this proposal. I am nowhere trying to discredit the work that has been done by the proposed management board here.
I personally agree that a complete open ended democracy is not the most efficient way to move forward especially in the future when the community will get bigger and bigger. I am FOR a management board that will have somehow extended power to take action for the benefit of the PP community and the token appreciation. But 70k CVP is just too much.
First, I think I think the $2 figure is hypocrite. It’s currently well above $3 before upcoming measure to reduce CVP liquidity mining, why do we need a management board if their target is $2? But fine let’s take $2 - that’s 140k USD which is most certainly higher than the day job of pretty much everyone here (for those who have a job).
@Defly - while I have no reason at all to disagree with your #1 #2 and #3, the fact that they are all anonym and that all the work that has been done so far is opaque for most of the new joiners is not helping. Regarding your #4 it’s confusing, you seem to suggest that its 70k allocation for the board as a whole while the original proposal clearly suggest 70k allocation for each member (so 5 * 70k). Also could you please explain how you derive from 70k to 58,333?
@Sergey - even if the tone of his message is not friendly, he did provided a concrete argument: there is no plan, no clear guideline, no concrete information about the board’s skills or network. Just some posts on this forum when you presented yourself for the politician position.
Few constructive ideas we can use from here:
- Agree with the concept
- Decrease the proposed allocation for each members
- Set up clear performance metrics over the next 18 months (CVP price for instance) as a trigger to release CVP reward for the board over a defined timeline
- Concrete plan proposed by the board with tangible goal (that we can link to the performance metrics stated previously) before we all vote for the proposal
Ultimately, we are all here thanks to the core team so if they think it’s a good idea and are fine with the rewards I would support. But they also need to make a statement and tell the other members of the community what they really think.
1 Like
New here also. I am too confused by the proposal. Is the board a 3-month assignment with 70,000 CVP, at which point the board renews for another 3-month term and another 70,000 CVP as compensation? Or is the assignment 18 months with 70,000 CVP distributed per seat monthly? That is unclear (this may have been detailed, but I am confused). If the assignment renews (same of different members) - and another tranche of CVP is awarded? If so, 70,000 CVP for three months of work seems rich.
Also confused by the 70,000 CVP = 58,333 CVP.
Any clarification is appreciated.
70k for 1 member with 18 month daily linear vesting is 3,888 cvp per month (70,000/18). So for 3 months that is 11,666 cvp for one member (3,888 * 3). For 5 members that is 58,333 cvp for 3 months in total (5 *11,666)
1 Like
Perhaps @Sergey, we can find a compromise on salary. At current prices for the first month each member will be getting 3.54 * 3,888 = 13763 usd for 1st month which is pretty high.
That is $57.35 per hour if you work 8 hours a day for every day which wont be the case. So in reality you are getting paid much higher wage per hour than that so that’s a conservative estimate.
Project managers in us earn yearly salary of $81,899 in the united states. https://www.indeed.com/career/project-manager/salaries so its much higher for board.
Aware that you are also on polkadot right and getting paid higher wages there as you said earlier. What if we went with something lower in the initial month as there is no plan yet and so community does not have any idea of what you can provide so they are concerned. Then in second third month go back to higher wage maybe?
Perhaps we can find a middle ground here so everyone is happy. Personally I am on either side here and I still think it’s not too bad considering it is only a little higher that beta/gamma testers tokens while board is doing much more work I hate bringing it up as I thought we got past it.
2 Likes
Thanks for your comment!
As I said, I hope we will bring it to $10, but atm:
- For $2 - please refer to historical price chart
- Please consider upcoming inflation from vesting 10mn CVPs
- Pretty possible less favorable market conditions, e.g in case the US stock market drops (while ETH made almost 4x, CVP made 2x, whats gonna happen in case ETH moves to $120 levels?)
Please consider 293 (in total) 50k testers allocations
Please compare input and time cost from most part of them
Please compare 70k vs ~500k+ CVPs of very well deserved rewards for each of the team members
This is not $140k - please keep in mind the time value of money and WACC for non-BTC crypto project (easily 70% discount factor)
Sorry mate, but if you really want to compete on CVs - I am open to it otherwise its hard to consider the statement above as an argument
This was a very relevant comment that the community commits not 350k (which is btw just 7 testers allocation out of 293 testers), but only 58.3k CVPs for 3 months
(58.3=70k/18 * 3), where 18 - is # of months the tokens to be vested, 3 - 3 months
It is his right to say whatever he wants.
But I am ready to consider criticism when it comes with counter-proposal.
Otherwise I can spent much less time than I am spending here and manage to criticize literally everything around:)
Plan - I provided the list of the most urgent workstreams in the comments, and as I stated, detailed plan is 25+ of work. Also please imaging what will happen in case we spent another 3-4 weeks on setting a detailed plan and putting it for community discussion?
We will discuss the plan for another 1-2-3 weeks
Community will forget about the proposal itself
We will probably have a nice discussion, but nothing will be done besides the plan
Guideline
Please ask what additional guideline is required besides what have been provided in the proposal - happy to elaborate
Board’s skills
happy to provide more info, I am not an anon.
Still why? “someone has less income” is not an argument imo, coz I can always say “someone has 10x more income”
Yes, this is nice. I wish we could do this, but please think how it will look like in practice?
CVP price should be $10. No $7, No 15, No 20, Yes 20. No 50
…4 weeks have passed…
Cool we set the price target at 50, no we can discuss the next KPI metric
…3 months have passed…
Lets discuss the proposal again! Oh… the whole world changed completely… well, lets just forget about this proposal
So that’s why I suggest to move forward as is.
The community and Team put under risk just a tiny 58k CVP. This is 1 tester’s allocation
to pay it to the community members which supported the project since the inception and try out the management model similar to what the leading projects are now implementing
2 Likes
Well, I am not saying it is low.
On the other hand I dont understand why to compare with a project manager in the US.
Lets compare to VP level investment bankers.
I just start feeling that I need to provide very detailed report on what I personally have done for PP and how much was it important.I dont like it.
We can also consider the situation what if there will be no management board. I think it will be much worth than having spent 58k CVP to try (with, again, community members who have been here since inception)
I dont know… ask me what you’d like to j=know about my previous experience - I ll provide relevant details. But what @ApplePie mean by “data on network” - how will this look like? I need to provide the list of funds, exchanges, platforms, brokers, and all the kind of institutional investors I know?
Should I ask all of them whether they are OK with me providing their names here? otherwise it will be not OK from ethos standpoint, right
So you guys want someone with 20k followers in twitter to be in the management board? Do you think this would really better? would you say, ah ok he/she has 25k followers so we will pay 200k CVP no worries. Or how it works
I plan to put this proposal on chain in coming days.
Probably AMA would help?
Otherwise we can spend weeks here chatting in the comments.
Actually this was one of the key reasons why I didn’t put this proposal in November - I anticipated it will stick in this kind of discussions.
In case we set up the board in November we would avoid so so many mistakes.
But the problem is that no one else put anything on forum, so someone have to receive all the criticism:)
1 Like
Yea i want this board to pass already lol, i am ok with the price payment. And yes if we don’t have this vs paying 58k we are worse of in the first case. So guys lets see the potential that this board can bring for us. Beta/gamma testers got paid huge amounts for doing very little for the protocol. Lets not get too hung up in payment for the reasons mentioned numerous time above its fairly reasonable.
4 Likes
All clear now. Thank you. Seems reasonable.
4 Likes
Hi Sergey,
Thank you for your answer. Look, again I have just joined the community recently so I don’t feel 100% comfortable to argue with someone that has been involved in the project since the beginning so I am not going to reply back on all your points. Just few comments / clarifications:
Agree that it is a weak amount compared to the allocation for testers but I think I have read somewhere that the plan was to cut a part of this allocation as even the core team recognized it was too much. Can someone confirm? (I am not going to make many friends here)
Sorry to be the slow elephant in the room but it’s still not 100% clear to me. Is it 58k CVP fully vested after 3 months for each members of the board? If that is the case the WACC argument is not very relevant. Or 58k CVP fully vested after 18 months? If so yes I can totally understand the 70% WACC/crypto discount. Also why just a 3 months job? My opinion is that if we set up a management board, they should be in place for the long run.
I don’t think I have ever try to ask you something like this 
But for instance I have just learnt by reading DeFly message that you are apparently involved with Polkadot? That’s exactly that kind of information that gives people comfort, no need to ask for more.
Bonus:
I was close to that level in a PE fund in London and definitely not making this amount. But I think it’s because I suck at negotiating my salary 
To conclude, I am happy if the core team is happy, really.
- No certainty though whether this happens or not.
- Still many testers will retain 100% of allocations
- Please don’t forget compare with the team’s compensation. I am happy to see another colleague with IB/PE background. Due to your background you can definitely compare 10x difference between the core team compensation and the management board - should it be 20x? I don’t think so
yes, to be fully vested in 3 months. that’s why 58.3k are under risk.
yes, WACC is applicable only in case we discuss 350k and 18m (see the numerous comments above where the folks make 70k/18months calcs to say “what a huge salary”, while in this case the tail which is after first 6m should be heavily discounted). so one cant say that the average salary is 70k/18m - this is fundamentally wrong.
3m because I believe this time frame will allow the community to see the firm results and review the management board principles and possibly propose to add / replace other candidates to it.
1m is too tiny time, 6m - is the best, but I don’t think the community will agree
hm… not sure I affiliated there. Know some of the core devs (tell them about $80k salary lol).
But if you are asking about my credibility, besides ~9 years in IB/PE/VC, I am currently an investor and member in theLAO.io and FlamingoDAO.xyz. Pretty reputable institutions, arent they?
please check out if not familiar
And yes, I am pretty well connected with institutional investors globally
Ahaahah, so why do you quote “project manager form US” salary? With all the respect we need rather investment banking / consulting type of background here (with deep experience in blockchain of course)
Yeah, I work in Infrastructure & Renewables
Maybe one of the first measure you can take as member of the board? People won’t care much about your comp if you start with this lol
Well… exactly then. I would definitely pick 58k CVP over 3 months rather than 70k over 18 months. Your previous argument re- the WACC is not very relevant. I still think it’s a lot. Regarding the time frame, I also think 6 months would be the best
I never did. It was DeFly quote. I don’t mind using the VP IB example but let’s keep in mind this implies prob 80+ hours a week and a miserable sexual life 
Just to make sure - the proposal is to allocate 70k for 18m
Each 3 months the community will be able to either kill management board or better kill a member or several members and put the others on their places. And these others will receive the remaining part of the allocation.
sorry:)
why 80+? 120+ lol
wellI I am speaking about the fixed part of total comp, so not 80 hours:)
UPDATE 2
Set the base rewards level at 50k CVP. Additional 20k are to be distributed in case either (I) $100 mn TVL achieved or (ii) DPI TVL is outperformed
I am putting the proposal on-chain
4 Likes
Sorry, its really hard to follow this conversation but as a summary:
Everyone out of those 5 people will get 50k or 70k when TVL > 100m vested over 18months.
= 140k Dollar if we stay at 2 Dollar (4,30 dollar right now) for a part time job.
I dont know where you guys are living, i live in Austria which is known that its not the poorest country on the globe, but those numbers are extremely high. I need to work for more than 3 years to earn 200k Dollar.
Im part of this community since the launch of yeti and im only around discord and i never heared of @zero and @defi. I guess they are devs and working with the team? But im sure they are very important community members, i just lack the information what they are doing. They also never answered to the latest proposals.
I dont know how i feel about this proposal. I really like the idea of a management board, i really hope that we see some good stuff evolving about it. As we have seen the community has awesome idea and some awesome memebers like @Defly @Glow @JaLa (i just name some, there are many many more) and we need people who have an overview about those idea.
They payment is extremely high in my personal opinion and i would prefere that people are getting payed in USD. I thought we were speaking about 4k a month (which still is exremely high for a part time job) but with this proposal we are looking at 9k+ (if CVP is at 2$, now we are close to 20k dollar a month) for a part time community board. But as it seems this is a crazy space and if you want good and active people you need to pay such saleries.
3 Likes
Yeah, exactly. So I think we are both agreeing that the VP banker is not a relevant benchmark here, right?
I have no understanding of why the board of managers, would need approximately 280k USD EACH, to help out in a community project… if they are passionate?
Everyone loves money, and everyone wants more. But wasn’t this project started off without a ICO for a reason?
The guys doing the brainwork, coding, staying up late, testing-failing-testing again to make sure it’s as bullet proof as possible, started all this without anything in the beginning.
Are those interested in being Manager’s not investors already? If not, why on earth have interest in it? If investors already, you not passionate about the fundamentals of the tokenomics and community collaboration? Why the need to make so much for your little time?
I propose the following options:
1: Every month the board wanting a big money grab, present a goal to reach. And an agreed payment in tokens are payed on delivery of the goal at month’s end/following month… All voted for by community. All transparent.
OR
2: Board elected is payed in a fixed USD amount, according to vote. Board reports every month on tasks done and accomplishments.
OR
3: The project continues is earlier tradition, with community in power. A group of selected community members in range of 10-20 people work in a coordinated fashion, deligating tasks and execute in a transparent way. The payment is split among the community members handling the tasks. Goal of this group is gaining traction and later we can choose to hire a more permanent board.
I would like to know what a few selected wanting 280k USD for 18month each, would be able to deliver, that 10-20 people splitting the tasks could not? And why these guys feel the need to make this amount of tokens, if they are passionate about the project?
The goal is traction of project and tokens value increase. This means that the 280k USD (current price), would be several times more.
Does not make sense for a community project that chose to start of as it did.
1 Like
The proposal is fair for the following reasons
-
Meets competitive salaries in crypto with equity incentives
-
Management board members’ progress is reviewed frequently in which we can stop receiving payments
-
Inactive testers stand to receive the same amount each if not more when inflation is factored in.
Yearn Finance Governance minted over $300M dollars for core supporters. We’re asking for 250,000 CVP or $1,000,000 at current prices for 2 years of work. I would not judge the CVP allocation based on bull market prices but use a more conversation moving average of the last couple of months.
This allocation is smaller than what the team has received back from inactive testers and will fund work that will bring tremendous value to the team. We have all invested months in time and energy helping to build the Powerpool community.
1 Like
You’re claiming that we’re trying to do a money grab, but your account is fairly new and your previous comment on another post was in regards to lower the inflation rate. It seems that you’re a speculative investor looking to limit inflation whether that means stopping allocations to inactive testers or core contributors.
Everyone loves money, and everyone wants more. But wasn’t this project started off without a ICO for a reason?
The guys doing the brainwork, coding, staying up late, testing-failing-testing again to make sure it’s as bullet proof as possible, started all this without anything in the beginning.
How did this work for Yearn?
1 Like
I don’t think it is contributing to the discussion to accuse community members that raise critiques. Instead, lets try to focus on being more transparent regarding the subject.
Maybe if the management candidates could elaborate about their previous work and the work they intend to do within their responsibility that might be more productive. Personally I’ve seen @Sergey, @vasilysumanov and @DrGonzo activity way more than @DeFi and @Zero. I’m not saying you guys do less but I think that the community deserve more transparency in this matter.
The big elephant in the room is testers allocation imo. Testers have got a promise to get way too much CVP allocation and that is the main reason the management board members feel they deserve a proportional amount. However, this might lead to the project failure due to over inflation.
The solution should be to decrease testers allocation before or at the same time of deciding management board members allocation imho.
1 Like