Folks, I’ve been thinking a lot about the assertion by some in the Community that MGRC members should be full time employees. I believe that this is the wrong approach. As I mentioned in this reply, I believe that MGRC members should be responsible for sourcing, mentoring, and providing guidance and oversight. I don’t believe that MGRC members should be responsible for execution (shipping software or other deliverables).
As it relates to compensation, I believe that MGRC members should have “skin in the game”, and receive ZEC, similar to how independent directors in early stage companies receive stock options. Fred Wilson at USV succinctly describes the parameters for this style of compensation in private and public for-profit companies, and I believe that his formula can be adapted appropriately for MGRC with some minor adjustments. We want MGRC members to be dedicated to the project: working hard to attract, develop and retain the very best applicants and recipients, while being good stewards of the funds that the community has entrusted to the committee. I believe that vesting ZEC over time is a great way to encourage long term thinking in MGRC members, and discourage short-term cash grabs and/or lazy bureaucrat behaviour.
I do believe that MGRC represents a material investment in Zcash on behalf of the community, and as such I think it makes sense that a singular full time employee be hired to work 100% on major grants, providing project management, administrative support, as well as muscle to help with the hard work of sourcing candidates, deciding how to allocate funds, and how to support and provide oversight for recipients over the life cycle of the fund. Spinning up an entity that can provide the necessary G&A functions to support full time employees is non-trivial, and as such I recommend that if the elected MGRC members agree that a full time PM/admin for Major Grants is appropriate, that that person be hired into an existing entity (such as the Zcash Foundation) rather than spin up a new entity.
DC