bubbidubb Thanks for the thoughtful comments.
6 month job security (If I understand this “allocation concept” correct)
Not everyone will be designated Consistent Contributor, and not every Consistent Contributor will get 6 month agreements, maybe 2 or 3 or 4 months. But imo it's really important to give full timers in the DAO better understanding of how much bread they can put on the table in the coming months.
Crypto-winter 2018/2019 lasted up to 2 years depending on how you measure. And that was without macro headwinds. This time, we are in new bear and macro looks like total shit. $28M is a shitload of money. Come on, man. 2.1 years?? Must do better.
If we achieve all the Bonus Goals then by definition the Treasury will be able to bond once again and increase the DAO treasury, so I don't think we'll ever hit the 2.1 years runway and be much closer to the 4 years. Especially for the Premium goal, increased premium means increased runway by definition since the DAO would pay out the same USD amount using OHM which has increased in value.
That said, what would be a proper runway length in your opinion?
Reaching 400M end of year is just a mere return to where we were on May 1st. Come on, man. Who sets a market value based bonus goal just after a crash – taking as reference a crash value?
I think it's good to increase this amount as we're already pretty close to it. Maybe 500 or 600.
We lack credible data on backing to assess this. Also 30d MA of price, or 30d MA on backing – be specific.
Good point, it should be 30d MA of both.
This is the only non-measurable objective. As such, I don’t like it.
I have to disagree with you on this one. It's perfectly fine to have a binary 0-1 goal, either the protocol achieves decentralized operations via the OCG + Risk Management Committee or it doesn't. Also I'm sure that tighter regulation will come as a direct result of the LUNA/UST and related fallout. We cannot be caught with our pants down when it happens. So it's not an internal pat-your-back thing, the consequences are dire in fact from a regulation standpoint. Even economically, many institutions and exchanges won't touch an asset that's centrally controlled, even via multisig.
Disagree fully with the notion that Olympus can just wait for the next bull market and profit big, even with poor team performance. The external market might help, but plenty of crap projects died even in the bull market. Also, the bonus weights are super important imo because they do allow for some flexibility while fairly punishing the DAO for not meeting certain objectives. I don't think it should be all-or nothing as that leads to significant motivation problems if it looks like we won't achieve them all simultaneously.
To be clear, all comp and bonuses are physically paid out in gOHM, like they are now.
The payouts from the DAO are extremely difficult to track on-chain.
You can check the DAO multisig for all the transactions, they're not really obfuscated. Plus the data studio link has deeper insights:
Thanks again for your comments.