GM, Why is there too much spending on Council + Trustees + Advisors?
Great work @Dacha on preparing this post.
As you can see, the Marketing DAO council has streamlined our Proposal process and we aim to ensure that the community get marketing support within the new timeframe.
We are also excited to be working with the NDC team to coordinate marketing initiatives for the forthcoming elections. Join the NDC Marketing HUB telegram group (linked above) and get involved!
5 Likes
Thank you for your outstanding work.
3 Likes
totally LOVE SEEING THE COMMUNITY SELF-GOVERN! 
look how far we have come in so little time…i kno…i kno…it feel like forever
KUDOS to @Dacha for his steadfast approach and strong leadership to RALLY the OG’s and form the Marketing Constellation! 
To all of you NDC contributors in the open, behind closed doors, in hidden chats we will never see. THANK YOU! 
#WeAreCommunity
10 Likes
Great stuff as always. I support this.
2 Likes
Awesome 
great initiative and ideology to form a constellation I’ve foreknowledge of more awesome news this initiative would exploit
1 Like
Why is Taylor getting an extra $1300 for the month of March? That was one of the months when he was working full time elsewhere and completely ghosted the DAO.
P.S - I’ve been told it is due to ‘slippage’. The position of the Marketing DAO has always been that it is the recipients responsibility to convert funds once they receive them. If Taylor were active on the NEAR ecosystem, he would know how to swap the modest amount of $2000 into stables on REF on pools that have deep liquidity.
It is totally unacceptable to increase the pay for that month by almost 70% out of his own actions.
2 Likes
Can we get a detailed breakdown of how much each council and trustee is getting paid?
Why has Carl not stepped down as a Council Member now that he is a Trustee? Is he getting paid for both roles?
2 Likes
Good Morning, instead of giving fake positive testimony/support to fill your belly with money from MULTIPLE JOBS salaries from being advisor, council, admin, core contributor etc etc…
please answer the question
Where have you been Taylor? Long time no see
Thanks for putting me on blast @satojandro
Due to miscommunication on the side of Near, they took nearly an extra month to finally pay me out.
We agree to make the payment in the price of Near with the poll was approved in AstroDAO (As per usual).
During that time Near saw quite a jump. This payment is adjusting for the internal mistake made by Near which resulted in a delayed payout which was the difference of over $1300.
There wasn’t anything in the charter that said someone couldn’t do the work of both.
Carl can handle the responsibility of both.
Please be more constructive AVB.
I have no idea who you are.
Who writes like that?
Please be constructive on here.
@satojandro to be completely clear, Taylor is NOT getting $1300 for the month of March. The payment is NOT due to ‘slippage’. Please see a detailed explanation below:
For transparency i would like to add some context for @TrustNDC to help clear any misunderstanding.
At the beginning of June the Marketing DAO were advised that they should seek to clear any outstanding proposals before completing the transition to an independent legal entity and from NF to NDC as funding provider. This included council members remuneration which had not been requested since February.
Our remuneration post was made on the forum link and each council completed their individual request via Ironclad. All of the council except Taylor recieved their payout within the normal timeframe.
Taylor asked @Dacha to see if he could help investigate why he had not recieved his payout and I believe both Dacha and Taylor raised this with @Benz_Near.
Unfortunately the issue was not resolved for many weeks, and I hope you will agree that it seems fair that the extra amount requested is to balance the difference between the token price, that the rest of the council recieved, and the amount Taylor recieved through no fault of his own. The $1300 figure covers the whole four month payment period and not just for the month of March.
2 Likes
Great work, love to see improvement in the MDAO systems and processes. Great work on the proposal!
3 Likes
I may be missing something here. The standard procedure for the Marketing DAO has been:
1 Council to approve amounts in USD;
2. Requests (polls, Ironclad, etc.) to be made in USD;
3. Grantees have the opportunity to the currency they get paid in (USDC or unlocked NEAR tokens)
4. If users select NEAR tokens, the payment is made for the USD balance at the exchange rate at the time.
This has been standard for all grantees for over a year.
- Why didn’t you choose to received payment from NF in USDC?
- Why did the Foundation take the amount of NEAR over the standard amount in USDC? (allegedly incurring a loss due to volatility). The poll on AstroDAO does not have a NEAR amount at all.
This is a case of double standards and preferential treatment. The DAO has never taken any responsibility for any market fluctuations that occur regardless of any delays in processing or payment. This is why payments are made for an agreed amount of USD for a specific job. It is impossible for DAO or NF to know whether you were going to hold or sell or stake or whatever. It is not reasonable to expect NF/DAO to assume all the risk while you extract maximum value in ways that are not available to grantees (for good reasons).
4 Likes
The lawyers were very specific in saying that it is undesirable to have the same person occupy both Trustee and Council Member roles. The understanding since March was that both Carl and I would step down as council members to become Trustees.
Concerning trend of the same people hoarding more power and more power to themselves…
2 Likes
Can you link the required ironclad and Proposal application forms here?
1 Like
AVB,
I’m repeating the same things here.
I agree with the payout procedure in your 4 points.
After those steps, Near is then awarded at the price of Near based on the time of the approved AstroDAO proposal.
Historically, with high volatility in the past, the payout has come based on the date of the approved poll and in certain instances, the Near Foundation has paid out based on a weekly average.
Given it took a month to finally get paid in the time between the Astro DAO poll approval and payment being received, there is a large difference in price.
Astro DAO Poll Approved:
June 20, 2023 - $1.23
After submitting the first invoice via ironclad, I got no response for weeks.
There were numerous clerical errors in processing my ironclad proposal.
- They couldn’t find my wallet address (which was noted in ironclad, astrodao, emails, etc)
- They couldn’t approve without additional documentation / comments to the contract
- Given the creation of the trust and migration to the NDC, there was confusion as to who would pay this out.
After sending all the documentation, they would wait 3 days to respond, and then ask for the same documentation. Then silence.
So I chased and chased, sent messages to different members of the foundation (long after the other council members were paid out).
It took a month to finally get someone to look over this with me and clarify my wallet id (which hasn’t changed).
Throughout my correspondence, I attempted on numerous occasions to confirm the price of Near that the proposal would be paid out.
As luck would have it, there was quite a jump in the price of near after submitting further documentation.
As you know, when the SEC’s case against XRP came out, all ALT coins saw a giant bump (including Near).
So, a full month after the approval on AstroDAO (June 20), I was paid out on July 19th when the price of Near was $1.51.
The difference came out to 18.5% or $-1,483.
That’s quite a bit a money for me (or anyone).
Given the volatility still in the market, I proposed a lesser amount and settled for $1300.
I have never seen you fight like this over such an amount spread over 4 months for remuneration given all the proposals and initiatives we’ve reviewed together during our time on the marketing DAO.
As a trustee of the Marketing DAO and Council Members, we need to find a healthy and constructive balance in working together.
If you want to discuss this matter further on a call, I welcome it.
I’m hoping this clears everything up.
After reading this I had some questions.
What is the form you are referring to?
This point is not completely clear to me.
It is mentioned that the members of the council and the advisers must make a decision to support or reject and later it is mentioned that the council must take the opinion of the advisers. what is the difference between both roles? Do the advisors give their opinion and also decide? o Do they only give their opinion for the council to decide?
Maybe I made a bad translation, but I want to be clear.
In the past, independent publications were made detailing the objectives of the quarter. Will this continue to happen?
With all the numerals in the table, I think that important information can be lost. Is it possible to have a tl;dr of the following?
- What is the maximum amount for a proposal?
- Can several proposals be submitted?
- I see that the budget of all approved proposals must be confirmed by the NDC trust, but is there a maximum monthly amount that the MDAO can achieve?
Outside of that, it is good to see that new proposals can be presented to the MDAO and great to see that there is a concrete vision to continue growing the NEAR ecosystem.
Thank you @Dacha and team
3 Likes