I’ve commented on this before, and my beliefs are mostly unchanged.
I think it’s a political nightmare. I put “Other”.
I think we would need to address the political nightmare head on:
- I just want to note the prices we’re saying here: $500/month for 1-2 hours/wk is $62.50-$125.00/hr. $750 gets us $93.75-$187.50/hr. These prices map onto 6-figure salaries (though obviously the hours aren’t there for that). The high end of this - 1 hour/wk at $750/month maps on to over $250k salary. (I’m using 1500 hours for conversion; one of several rough rules of thumb for contract work to salary mapping)
- The bar must be dramatically higher than it’s been.
- It’s completely unacceptable for a paid position to require nagging to sign something, eg.
- Communication must also improve a lot – “I’m going to be traveling so I won’t be able to sign at our usual time the 3rd week of November”.
- For some context, we are paying the dev team $163.5k/3-periods at current RPL prices (both pDAO expense and oDAO seats). (though it’s worth noting they had ICO funds etc too, so we’re not the entirety of their funding)
- If we’re paying 14% as much to the GMC as to the dev team (that’s the $500 price + admin), my expectations are significant.
- I take real issue with paying the same for 1 hr/week as for significantly more than 2 hours per week. If someone is creating 4x the value, we should pay them a hell of a lot more (maybe not 4x, but…). (I’ll also note that I do think output value is a better target than input hours, but I understand that’s super hard to measure).
- People who put in work before stipends should be rewarded; more cuz pure volunteering without any guarantee is good; less insofar as they did less
- We should pay for all similar positions; here that would mean IMC and pDAO treasurer.