Can you link the required ironclad and Proposal application forms here?
[Announcement] Marketing DAO constellation (NDC v0), new proposals, funding procedures, July's funding request
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