Hi @satojandro would you please post your progress along with your reimbursement request?
It would be great to see how active the Guild has been in the last month.
Curious what other tools are in use. Why did these get bucketed together when everything else was a line item?
What’s the advantage of this community site? We have so many channels that this feels like unnecessary fragmentation. I’m interested in UX but don’t want to check a circle in addition to the Mintbase telegram, Paras discord, etc channels where UX discussions and feedback is happening with engaged community members. We also have Product Design forum category.
How is meetup being used?
I do see the need for landing pages like uxisnear.com to orient people and give them a clear “JOIN” CTA.
I voted this through because it’s the first time we’ve run into a situation like this and the team is learning how to best govern moving forward.
In this situation (as I understand it) compensation for setup was promised without specifying an amount to be spent, and compensation was requested retroactively months after the activities were complete.
In the future there should be a playbook to onboard new guilds with software as they need it. A guild can get started with an email account for each member and $10/year domain. Requests should be made up front for additional softwares and the way in which each will be used, and (if it falls outside the guilds core monthly funding) what additional engineering resources are needed and what the outcome will be.
We will be more transparent with the initial funding structure of Guilds, the activity covered by those funds, and we encourage feedback from the guilds if the “guild starter package” funding is not enough to run their organization, so we can re-evaluate and update out on-boarding ramp. This will also alleviate concerns about paying for the same activities twice through multiple DAO proposals.
Thanks Ross. Very thorough and accurate assessment of the situation.
It is worth mentioning that this request is somewhat unusual as, SC being one of the incubated guilds’ first cohort, we have been given a standard budget and a schedule for the budget to increase over time.
As I understand it, the core reasoning behind establishing recurring monthly budget was to allow guilds to focus on building and to provide peace of mind that they could be as creative in the initiatives taken, and as aggressive and fast in execution knowing that there would be money coming in consistently to both reimburse them and remunerate their efforts. Most importantly, to reduce the time and uncertainty of bureaucracy.
My understanding was that these expenses would be covered by the base budget, which is why I incurred some long-term thinking expenses. However, I raised the issue that since the original budget was passed, the value of Near (and broader market) has fallen sharply. After these expenses are deducted, there is little to no remuneration left for guild leaders.
We need to strive for a balance between accountability and output on the one hand and balancing incentives and creating the psychological safety for community members to be able to step up and take bold initiatives.
Our updated roadmap is coming up today. We’ll make sure that moving forward, additional funding is discussed and approved prior to spending.
Hey @satojandro, this post has been updated so it’s clear that the Sandbox was not involved in this expense and I’ve added a tag for your use [“silicon-craftsmen-g”] to be added to your future posts for ease of reference.
Would be good to see a full introduction post for this Guild here on the Forum (like what the new Legal Guild, Flying Rhino, etc. have done these past few days) with the roadmap you’ve mentioned and an overview of how the Guild has grown since your launch in June. As mentioned in the call we had a couple of weeks ago, we want to hear how all the Wave 1 Guilds are doing, especially now that the Wave 2 Guilds are launched in this Incubation Track as well and there seems to be a lot of activity going on!