Proposal “core-comp-201807“ (Closed)Back

Title:Core Team Compensation (July)
Owner:glennaustin
One-time payment: 1895 DASH (301401 USD)
Completed payments: 1 totaling in 1895 DASH (0 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2018-06-18 / 2018-07-17 (added on 2018-06-05)
Votes: 876 Yes / 57 No / 13 Abstain

Proposal description

This proposal is cross-posted from https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-core-team-compensation-july.38534/

Background
Most of the information covered below was provided in last budget cycle’s compensation proposal.  The only drastic change versus that proposal is the increase in requested funding ($600,000 in this proposal versus $360,000 in last month’s proposal).  As communicated previously, the need for this increase is three-fold:
1) Our current run-rate including benefits and targeted salary increases is ~ $430,000 monthly.
2) To onboard our international subcontractors to the professional employment organization we need to provide an upfront deposit representing 2 months employee benefits/salary due to laws and regulations governing employee termination.  We expect to incur an upfront expense of $80,000 in July as we begin the onboarding process for some of our international subcontractors.
3) We have an urgent need to rebuild a buffer in the Core Team Compensation budget to account for potential Dash volatility.  We will continue to request funding above the run-rate until our compensation budget has 2-3 months of funding built into it.  We will also start the practice of converting some of our Dash into fiat in this particular budget line going forward.  The buffer requested for this budget cycle is $90,000.

What does this proposal fund?

This proposal funds the Dash Core Group's ongoing compensation costs - including all developers, administrative, and support staff - at market rates for base pay, including some benefits which we are now beginning to roll out as certain contractors are converted to employee status. By extending employment and benefits to our key contributors, we aim to improve the sustainability of working for the Dash Core Group by providing compensation and benefits commensurate with the market. Providing these benefits greatly improves retention and provides a more stable workforce to the network.

The run-rate has increased in the past few months and we expect it to increase further due to a number of factors including:
a)    Extending benefits to staff that are transitioning from contractors to permanent employees of Dash Core Group Inc.
b)    Increase in the total number of employees/subcontractors as open positions are filled
c)    Targeted salary increases for employees and subcontractors to align with market rates including adjustments to account for blockchain experience
d)    New administrative costs charged by our global employment, payroll, and benefits provider for servicing employees
If you have any questions, please direct them to @glennaustin in this Dash Forum post to ensure we are notified of your request.

Requested funding is as follows for the July 2nd budget cycle:

·      1,889.97 Dash for core team compensation ($600,000 USD @ $317.446 per Dash)
·      5.00 Dash proposal reimbursement
Total: 1,894.97 Dash

Note: Should any funding remain, we will apply it toward future compensation expenses.

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
1 point,3 months ago
I think the Core team is too big and has sunk too much money into Evolution. The project was too big. Big projects should be delivered in small pieces that each provide value.

I want there to be a funded Core team, but the only way for me to vote against the continued growth is to vote no on this proposal. Next time, please split the compensation proposal into 2 or 3 proposals so we can support a 1. smaller team, 2. team remaining the same size, 3. growing team.
Reply
1 point,3 months ago
buffer is needed coz team feels they fail to deliver the roadmap on time? how about cut of funding instead of raise? looks like people got used to expensive market price
Reply
3 points,3 months ago
I am voting No to protest the roadmap failure. A roadmap is a very high level plan. with a schedule. with dates. If you are taking treasury money, there is no excuse for not having one or for having one and not making it public. This sort of high level transparency is not optional for any period of time! Saying "be patient, the roadmap is coming" is not good enough. It must be published before funds are approved. When it is published I will change my vote.
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
Dash has is one of the lowest performing crypto assets of 2018. In order to justify the core budget that seems to increase each cycle even during this bear market, I think Core should be giving a detailed budget report. Salaries can be kept anonymous. And I would suggest that an update to the roadmap must come out before the next budget approval.

MNOs are the shareholders and are legally bound to hold officers accountable. Its increasingly obvious that MNOs need to try and coordinate their actions to reign in reckless spending and undisciplined teams. I'm not sure how this could start but if anyone wants to fund a website only for masternodes to communicate privately I would vote for it.

Dash continues to miss opportunities and the frustration is beginning to surface (thank God!!). Given all that we have (features, low supply, governance) Dash is mocked and passed up by far inferior projects. Now this is not Core's fault entirely and blame can be put at the community's feet, but I do think that Core failing to realize that our image issues aren't going to go away with just better tech, will be the greatest blunder in crypto history. Evolution will fail miserably unless we get people excited about Dash now. Venezuela and Ghana will not save the project. Plus without sufficient closed loop systems in these countries Dash growth will only translate to more fiat conversion and selling pressure. The importance of hodlers has been demonstrated for years. I suggest reading Daniel Krawitz work to understand more.

I'm voting no to protest the lack of accountability I see with this project and the ongoing waste of resources and opportunities. Evan introduced Evolution over two years ago. We have a paid team working on it ever since. The community has grown completely infatuated with this single project and I fear we will all be let down by further delays and unimpressive investment after its release bc we failed to grow Dash investment right now. The future is now.
Reply
2 points,4 months ago
I have followed the links given and read the information on the following links:

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-core-team-compensation-july.38534/

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-core-group-q1-2018-summary-call-4-may-2018.37451/

PDF summary of call here:
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/...sh-Core-Group-Q1-2018-Summary-Call.pdf?api=v2

I have not watched the video due to time constraints, but key information should be in written format. The PDF document is good but it does not give the information I am looking for and neither do any of the references above as far as I can see.

I want to see a breakdown of the numbers of people working in core and what they are doing. At the moment the information on the links above is given in aggregate data only making it impossible for MNOs to assess this funding request.

The word "core" is now becoming a very diverse word. Including software development, Marketing, finances, legal, strategy, business development, human resources, recruiting. As this "core" organization grows more funds are being absorbed, as is the case this month and I am sure other months to come. More and more "core" members are coming on board yet little to no information or breakdown as far as I can see on exactly how many people are involved in each of these divisions of "core"

The word "core" used to mean the software developers and architects. Now it means something completely different.

Building DASH this way is one way to do it but it is not the only way to do it and I do not believe it is the best way of doing it. Why do I say this? What could we also consider?

The above model of "Core" is increasingly looking like a centralized body. This means that power over DASH essential operations is beginning to move into one corporate entity called "Core" . Now whenever a proposal is put forward and it has the word "core" at the front of it just as the proposals posted this month have, the MNOs invariably vote it through.

One other suggestion however is this:

Instead of all these different activities all going to core why don´t we have a separate DAO for each area that we need? This way it is more decentralized and that DAO will need to complete against others. In this way we gain a much stronger, robust, decentralized and better quality solution that we can vote on fairly. Lumping all these different activities into "core" is not the best model for DASH.

In my opinion Core should be the software programmers and developers and we should have separate DAOs for the other activities that the network needs like Marketing, Business development, PR department etc. This way if we need to replace one of these divisions because they are not performing we can do it. At the moment we cannot do this with the core setup at the moment.

There are some divisions of core doing a first class job but there are other parts of core that I don´t feel are doing a good job at all.

Core should not be involved with PR activities. They should be consulted if there are technical issues that need to be addressed however PR and marketing would be best to be in completely separate DAOs and open to debate and assessment by the MNOs which is our role, our duty, and our responsibility. At the moment the word "core" is now meaning too many activities to be optimal.

The core proposals posting are also some of the lowest quality I have seen out of all the proposals. They do not give all the information necessary for us to make an informed decision and MNOs have posted questions and received no replies to legitimate requests for information to assess the proposal.

My opinion is we need separate and independent DAOs for Marketing, PR, Business Development, Innovations, Human Resources etc. Each of these DAOs will need to complete to put forward their proposals in detail and be open to debate to the MNOs so that we can provide the feedback insights, questions that can improve these DAOs. It is only by challenging, contributing and debating ideas and strategies that we can get stronger.

Core is not Core any more and we need to decide which is the best model for DASH to evolve. One in which Core does everything or do we go for a model of Decentralized DAOs where it is much more accountable and more likely to get better quality service through openness to debate instead of rubber stamping which is what is more or less happening now? Is it just me that thinks the separate DAO models would be better? What are the views of my fellow MNOs?
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
This is a very wrong viewpoint, and I'll do my best to explain why we need core to stay as it is.

First from what you just said it would seem you believe that core has so many different divisions and the software teams are a minority. This is not true, Core is still mostly staffed by software teams. These software teams need a project manager and a product owner. Why do we need product owners? Well last year and even a little this year the original and arguably the most knowledgeable devs took on those roles and this basically led to us coding far less. Hence we hired product owners. If you check my github you can pretty much guess when I dropped the PO role and solely committed to dev. I have a good view over my team (mobile) and we have found our groove now that we have those dedicated roles helping us.

Second the hired devs need to be recruited and paid. Which is why we have a HR, a CFO to do proposals, and maybe one more person to either help with recruitment. Up till now this makes sense right?

Third, we have industry contacts that want to partner with Dash Core pretty frequently. They want to partner with the entity that has the power to write code for the network. They would not want to partner with a business entity out of reach of the developers. There is no way to decouple the business dev from core. Our business dev team is also just a few members big, and they are working at full capacity.

Fourth, we make products, these products need support, hence we need a product support team that is able to interact directly and quickly with the devs to squash bugs as fast as possible. These support members also write developer and user documentation. Again things that need their members close to developers.

Fifth, marketing, we have a very small marketing team, and almost all marketing proposals go to the network. The only thing this proposal is paying for is maybe the salary of the CMO and a marketing assistant. Again these people help core deal with external companies after marketing proposals pass to make sure the work gets done.

Sixth, strategy, you the community want updates right? Do you want those updates to be done quickly by devs who have a lot on their plates already or would you prefer these devs give notes and a more comprehensive plan be presented to the community? Strategy department is also very important to make sure we align our coding with other teams and that strategic hires are made in case one team needs more people.

This is an over simplified message written hastily about why Core needs to stay together. Core is still core, just because the price is down doesn't mean we need to make stupid changes. I've been in this project since it's first week or so. I personally believe that we are at the best place we have ever been and that the best is yet to come.
Reply
0 points,3 months ago
Well done and explained. Please keep doing the great job.
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
Expense breakdown, please.
Reply
2 points,4 months ago
As it was told, it is here: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-core-group-q1-2018-summary-call-4-may-2018.37451/
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
@glennaustin If MNOs vote yes just because it has the word "Core" we are not fulfilling our role as MNOs. Our role as MNOs is to ensure that all funds, that is ALL FUNDS INCLUDING CORE'S REQUESTS FOR FUNDING are professionally and impartially assessed. No special dispensations to anyone, including core. If we do not do this we are setting one standard for core and another standard for everyone else. Double standards is not what generates trust and respect. Core need to be held accountable for their requests for funds in just the same way as any other proposal does. If we do not insist on this then we are not fulfilling our role as MNOs and we are jeopardizing the integrity and success of the DASH network. If the core team can demonstrate where exactly the money is going and that it is being used wisely then it will get voted in. If core cannot demonstrate transparently where all the funds are going specifically then we cannot complete our role as a MNO. It is only through radical transparency that we can be sure the funds are all being used for the best for the network.

I am requesting a complete breakdown of how the requested funds are being used. That includes all salaries, numbers of developer and all other staff members and what they are paid, what the bonuses and incentives are for each and every person in the core team.
Reply
2 points,4 months ago
I agree with this 100 percent. Transparency is essential for Dash, and I will not blindly approve proposals just because they are coming from Core. Voting NO for now.
Reply
2 points,4 months ago
I think asking for each persons salaries opens a massive can of worms. What happens if people realize that someone else in their team is getting paid more than them? It’s visible how many people we have in the core team. If you want an idea about what salaries really are, just look at the blockchain, you just won’t be able to know who is getting what.
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
I do agree with @DeepBlue. All proposal must be treated in the same way, even if they come from Core (that is DAO). So, a clear and justified breakdown must be shown if they want MNOs fund their proposals.

Voted abstain until it is clarified.
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
Reviewing all the comments and the link that TroyDASH pasted: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-core-group-q1-2018-summary-call-4-may-2018.37451/ I believe the core team have been as much transparent as the can. Change my vote from abstain to YES. Thanks Core team.
Reply
-1 point,4 months ago
I couldn't find a budget breakdown anywhere in the link. And regardless, this should be part of the proposal, not hidden in some forum thread.
Reply
-1 point,4 months ago
I doubt MNOs are voting for Core just because of their name. That makes little sense...

My reasons:
1) They are doing a good job and have increased communication that shows the progress they are making. I am impressed with their work.

2) No alternative team exists to date that will get us to Evo in the same timeframe.

3) This is the most professional team in the crypto space. And while that is in part due to having proper funding, there is no garantee that if we give them the boot we will be any better off in the future.


As for public salaries, even in a vacuum I completely disagree and posted my reasons in response to you below.

To this specific situation, I think delaying Evo futher (i.e. not funding Core this month) in order to fight for public salaries is... (being polite as can here) patently absurd.
Reply
5 points,4 months ago
Should we not be expecting Core to set the standards for other proposals by being completely transparent for where the money is going by providing a complete breakdown of costs?

Could you provide a breakdown of all costs?

Currently you are aggregating all the costs which makes it impossible for MNOs to determine where exactly the money is going and how it is being used exactly.

We would expect this from any other proposal.

Core has previously put forward some proposals that have not been that good and have not passed because they have not been that beneficial e.g. the ASU proposal for students and also the google pay per click ads marketing proposal from Fernando in the past etc The ASU proposal was not voted through and we have not heard anything from Fernando on the ppc proposal with google - where did that 1200 DASH go? I don't feel these were value for money proposals when we have much more valuable proposals.

This proposal is for salaries for core staff however MNO's would appreciate transparency on how you came to the value of $600 K for these salaries by providing a complete breakdown.

If you look at other proposals e.g. the Venezuela conference proposals they provide a breakdown every cost and are held accountable for everything. Do you feel that Core has a special dispensation in this area?

We now have a finance manager. Therefore there should be no reason why you cannot provide a full breakdown of costs so we can see where this money is going exactly. It also sets a good example for all proposal owners as you will then be leading by example.
Reply
5 points,4 months ago
I don’t think asking for people to make their salary public should be expected nor is it proper.

In other proposals like the ASU one you may have a point, but, for example... if my boss published my salary then that would be grounds for me leaving the company as most people consider that information very private.
Reply
5 points,4 months ago
@JGCMiner, I have thought further about your comment further about we should not make public salaries. I now disagree with that point of view. I think we should make them public. In the UK all politician's salaries are made public, including the prime minister. If a company is professional is publishes all the salaries of the directors so that the shareholders can see where the money is going. In your company your boss will fire you for giving away your salary, my response to that is why is that? Getting fired for disclosing how much money you make? Really? Do you think that is a proportioned response. You loose your job because you disclose what you earn for a living? Have we been so used to being controlled by our senior management to the extend that we are now actually defending their irrational control over our lives? Really?

If someone is asking us to fund them, which is the case here, why is it not reasonable to request how much money each person is getting? Isn't one of DASH's core values about radical transparency? Any time there is information hidden or secret there is the possibility of the start of corruption later down the line.

What is our role as an MNO? Is it not to fairly assess a proposal and to ensure that the funds are being best used for the network? How can we do that if we do not have the specific information needed to do that.

If Core is asking us to administrator funds I feel all core team salaries should be made totally transparent and open to the public so that we can see where the money is going. All bonuses should be made completely open and transparent. I don't see why it should be kept in secret if everything is above board.

Radical transparency is what DASH is about. I though that was one of our core values. As far as I am aware the words Radical transparency means Radical Transparency. Or should we modify that phrase and say "Radical transparency for every other proposal owner other than core ? Because currently that is what you and others are proposing by not requesting the details.

I am asking to see the earnings for every person in the core team. Including their budgets and bonuses. Anything other than that,is not Radical transparency. If people are being fairly compensated then there should not be any issue with doing this.
Reply
3 points,4 months ago
I fundamentally disagree.

It is a big can of worms that can lead to infighting if some members think they should be paid more relative to their peers. We are dealing with humans here — not robots, and you have to take into account for potential changes in your workforce’s emotional state due to your actions and how their work may be impacted going forward. Remember, “fairly” is a fundamentally subjective word. You are not like to have a workforce of near 100 exactly agree on what is “fair compensation” and that is before you bring in the inherent irrationalism of human emotions.

Also, the example you provided in gov’t is not really relavent as the talent market dynamics are quite different in the public and private sectors. In particular, Blockchain dev talent as well as management talents in this field are at a premium.
Reply
2 points,4 months ago
Hello @JGCMiner isn't DASH about fairness, radical transparency and empowering people? If one person is getting paid more than another and they are both doing the same quality work - is that fair? If someone wants to move on because they feel they are not getting paid correctly for what they are doing they can bring the matter up with whoever pays them. If they decide to move on then they are not a true believer in what we are about because ironic as it may sound DASH is not about the money. We are about Honestly, Radical Transparency, Empowering People. These values are the opposite of secrecy. We cannot have it both ways. I believe in privacy and I believe that it is possible to still publish salary earnings and bonuses but maintain someone's privacy. However we still need to see what is being delivered for that money.

DASH is private but we can still see on the blockchain the transaction. That proves that that DASH coin exists. Unlike other coins which hide everything that can lead to corruption later on because it is not transparent as to how many coins may exist.

In addition we cannot fulfil our role as MNOs with proposal posting like this one. If we remove the word Core from this proposal nobody would vote for it. It is an extremely poor proposal posting. It lacks details and appears to be Core saying "we know you will vote us in so this is what we need" That is not good enough Core. You should be setting the standards for all other proposal owners. Currently you are acting out of a double standard. Rather like the EU where they pay next to no tax but then expect all other nations to be paying high tax rates. Double standards leads to lack of respect because you are not leading by example.

I cannot fulfil my role as MNO on this proposal because I don't have the information I need to make an informed decision and give reasoned suggestions on how the money is being spent.

Therefore I am not going to vote on this proposal. I am also not voting Abstain as I stated earlier or voting NO. I am just not going to vote. I think this proposal falls well short of what we expect from any proposal owner.

DeepBlue
Reply
4 points,4 months ago
If we publish salaries of our talented employees we might as well put a big signpost up for our competitors to come and take their pick..

It’ll create all sorts of practical and real problems with regards to the management and operation of the dash core Dao.. and for what benefit? Some arbitrary judgement on what transparancy and accountability should entail?

It wouldn’t achieve anything and would do a lot of harm to our competitive positIon in this space.

Walter
Reply
2 points,4 months ago
Hello Walter, thanks for sharing your perspective. I believe the core team are not working on DASH just for money or getting a better offer. They are working on DASH because they believe in what we are trying to achieve. If someone is lured away by a better salary then it means their convictions perhaps are not truly what DASH is about. Empowering people and Radical transparency. Radical transparency is a core value of what DASH is about because with transparency and openness there is a basis for truth and honesty, and we are sorely in need of more of that in this world.

Whenever there are secrets there is a host of problems that can arise. The first is we cannot debate or challenge how the funds are being used. This means we are most definitely not making the most of these funds because perhaps there are better ways to invest. Secondly there is the possibility for corruption, maybe not now but certainly later down the line as the organization grows. We need a system to ensure that cannot happen because if it does it could destroy everything that DASH is about and what we are aiming to achieve.

We keep our source code open source exactly for that purpose - radical transparency so that all the world can see that there are no backdoors or hacks that can unfairly take people's money. Why do we publish our code as open source if radical transparency is one of our core values?

I don't see any problem with publishing the salaries and bonuses of everyone. I believe this topic ought to at least be debated to explore this area more so we can come to a reasoned conclusion.

When core projects are posted there is the absolute minimum amount of information provided for us to do our job as MNOs to assess these projects dispassionately. I find it impossible with project posting like this. We should not have to go off and try and find the information we need in other sources. The proposal should be to the standard as any other proposal. All information with links necessary to assess the proposal needs to be in the proposal. The way these Core Proposals are posted is as it it is a given they are going to get the funding just because they are core. That is a double standard.

If we take out the word "core" and just have this proposal posted as it is then I don't think a single MNO would vote for it. It is a poorly presented proposal, with limited information for MNOs to fulfil their role and duty to fairly assess these proposals.

If we are just going to keep voting in Core proposals without giving them their fair assessment or asking core to live to the values they say are part of DASH (Radical transparency and empowering people) then why even post the job ? Why not just vote for all core proposals to go through every time and not even appear in DASH central.

I am voting no based on the fact that this is a poorly presented proposal where I do not have enough information to make an intelligent informed decision. I cannot even make recommendations or suggestions or even debate against how the money is spent because no breakdown is give. People may say we need to trust core however I say it is not a matter of trust, it is a matter of being able to do our job as MNOs and assess and give feedback on how the funds are used to ensure they are being uses optimally. Core are focused on development. We are focused on assessment of these proposals that is our role.

Look in history, every time we trust people of power without radical transparency what has happened. It is not that people are evil it is just that it is human nature to want the very best that we can get from a circumstance and it takes exceptional human beings such as Gandhi to resist that type of power. But even if all the core team are Gandhi like people we still need to challenge ideas so that they become better. If we are not insisting upon this we may as well just rubber stamp every core proposal.

Therefore I am voting ABSTAIN until I can do my job as an MNO. To do that I need the details of how our money is being spent.

DeepBlue
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
Hello JGCMiner, thanks for your comment. Let me clarify what I'm asking. I am not asking for personally identifiable information to be disclosed with a specific salary for each person as you have stated. That is not what I'm requested. I'm requesting a breakdown of the costs to get a better idea of where the money is going. Currently the whole sum is lumped into one figure and we cannot see what money is going to the developers, to PR and how many staff for each activity.
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
If this is all you are after then I would think that the balance sheet that TroyDASH has kindly linked below will be sufficient.
Reply
0 points,4 months ago
DeepBlue, I think the income statement and balance sheet that is always published with the quarterly core team summaries have sufficient spending breakdown information.
Latest: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/dash-core-group-q1-2018-summary-call-4-may-2018.37451/
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
Hello @TroyDASH, thank you for the link. I have checked it however I do not see a spending budget breakdown on the link you gave. Core team ideally need to post the breakdown in the job description so all the information is in one place. Currently I cannot do my role as an MNO to fairly assess this proposal because I do not have the information needed.

I do not believe we should vote in any project that is posted just because it comes from Core. All proposals need to be fairly assess, if for no other reason for us to make suggestions in areas where we can see funds are being used that we feel may be better used in another area.
Reply
5 points,4 months ago
Thank you for getting this up early Glenn.
Reply
7 points,4 months ago
No worries. Since DCG is requesting a significant portion of the overall monthly budget it is only be fair to get all 4 proposals up very early in the cycle. Stay tuned for the other 3 - I'm working hard to get them all posted tonight.
Reply
0 points,4 months ago
Very happy, to see Core building up a buffer. 2 or 3 months is still a bit light do.
Reply
1 point,4 months ago
YES. LOVE the BUFFER BTW. 100% behind this.
Reply
-2 points,4 months ago
If they don't get this money, would they be unable to cash out the $xxx,XXX of Dash to pay to set this new payroll and all up?
Reply