Hey! Check this out!
This is going to be my last word on the subject (hopefully).
If being able to modify 1014 is in anyway a deal breaker for you serving on the MGRC then I would urge you to watch this podcast with Josh Cincinnati. He very eloquently sums up the foundations stance and his own personal stance. The foundations stance is the communities stance, this is what I keep referencing when I reference the community. (not this specific podcast I only listened to that today)
- https://pca.st/6eta66gj (h/t @autotunafish - thanks for posting this in another thread on the forums.)
It is a great primer on the history of the foundation and general zcash lore.
I would then urge you to read all of the news letters released regarding this. Read them in the correct order to get a feel for how the discussion progressed. Start at “July 18, 2019”
If you still think your modification would be a good and welcome modification please submit a pr request before the vote. Being on the MGRC gives you no extra power over 1014, or any zips, than a normal community member. Submitting the PR now will give you an idea to if it is likely merged and put to the CAP. The standard procedure would be to post it to the forum first for community feedback. None of this stuff is ambiguous. I am willing to help you write the pull request.
This includes things like:
- changing the terms, within the first year.
- changing how the zfnd “funds” the MGRC
- any modification of “all of the MG slice goes to MG’s”
- wanting the MGRC to receive an MG to fund its operations.
- any form of fiat, at all, with the MG slice.
It would be very bad for zcash if you were elected to the MGRC just to step down because the community will not pass you amendments to 1014.
I truly apologize for having to cancel with such short notice. We are preparing for the storm this morning and helping relatives evacuate ahead of the hurricane. I’ve had poor connection or dropped all my calls this morning and I do not want to distract from others contribution. I will not be able to attend the call.
Best wishes for the safety of you and yours! Hopefully you can get your answers in front of the voters somehow once you’re all safe.
curious if any @MGRC-Candidates advocated for, or were excited about a technology that zcash should’ve deployed, but didn’t. also curious if candidates feel they are confident they’re capable of accurately estimating potential market value of different technologies that zcash might deploy.
i’ll start - was really excited about XCAT
zcash was on the forefront of interoperability research/development in 2017, but didn’t deploy XCAT.
i feel like we lost around $1 billion in market cap to other projects by not deploying XCAT.
I think XCAT was a missed opportunity.
But @jasondavies was supposed to be working on it again? If not then I could see something like the MGRC putting out a bounty/request to complete it.
Also relevant: Cross-Chain Atomic Transactions / Project Alchemy / Stellar
But let’s start a separate thread if we want to deep-dive into XCAT ideas @kek
Paying people $500 a month to disburse millions of dollars in grants seems like smart incentives engineering…
I get that we’ve moved on from the initial interpretation of the ZIP from many,many weeks ago when ZF made the statement that candidate compensation policies would be a campaign issue:
As per other elements of the MGRC’s operation, we believe the initial MGRC can and should self-determine fair, market-based compensation taken from their share of the dev fund. They should understand that they will need to be very transparent about their decision publicly, or they will likely face pressure from the Foundation, ECC, and the broader community. Whatever they compensate themselves will not be available to the third-party developers from their slice, so they should consider their views on compensation carefully — ideally during the candidacy period.
We now have the ZF definitively stating that the MGRC cannot compensate members from their share of the devfund - making months of debate and candidacy around this topic moot - on the eve of the deadline for candidate announcements, and only one week before the election.
Further, it is clear that any options for correcting the incentives of the MGRC live beyond the scope of the MGRC elections, with the CAP and the ZIP process. As in these are not election issues.
I’ll be honest and state that I’m not sure the MGRC can be effective given those constraints - it certainly can’t operate itself in a way that maximizes grant effectiveness. 5 hours a month is not enough time to review new grant proposals, vote on them, follow up with grantees and assess current grantee performance (in addition to handling the cases where things don’t go to plan) and given those constraints the MGRC is in danger of becoming captive to other incentives outside of the direct will of the community - especially when considering candidates who are already paid to work within the Zcash ecosystem full time or whose priorities are malleable.
I hope the community will understand the power dynamics that are now at play and vote for an MGRC that can operate effectively given the freshly-illuminated state.
A post was split to a new topic: Sandy Ordonez for MGRC
I think those are arbitrary figures and the actual amount of time spent working on this will depend on the particular person i.e. mission driven
I also think the compensation offered for this volunteered charity position rather generous and probably comforms to a legal threshold
I agree, it is very generous for charity work, and I think that if the remit expands and people are spending more time then the zfnd will compensate them according to fair market value for their work. Something they have shown they can do - but this is extra and not standard, there is no guarantee this work will even exist.
I personally much prefer this structure, especially for an inaugural committee, over arbitrarily handing out large salaries.
I think the statement is a strong reflection of the sentiment behind 1014 at the time.
sure hope so. MGRC would be completely ineffective if they only work 5 hours a month. this committee will hold the future of the ecosystem on it’s shoulders.
It will depend on how many applications the MGRC gets I would think. I don’t expect dozens of applications every month to pour in but we will see.
zcash is doomed if MGRC operates in this manner. future of the ecosystem cannot be 100% dependent on hoping a good proposal gets offered one day.
being said, even if MGRC chooses the path of failure - expecting a bullish 2021. MGRC should see a major uptick in proposals offered during a bull market. quite a few proposals will be scams, and troll proposals. completely possible MGRC could spend 5 hours a month weeding them out alone.
[Removed section implying how the ZFND intended for MGRC to operate]
The first two rounds of grants in 2017 and 2018 took about that much time (or slightly more) and members were not compensated for the effort. So the fact that the Foundation is offering any compensation, and it’s coming from their own budget not the MGRCs, is a step further than it was before.
Personally, as a part time gig, I think the amount is generous if the hours are that few. However if there is a full time position, then the numbers should be adjustable based on hours worked.
who’s currently running the show at ZF?
ZF is already a very unimpressive organization. really don’t think it’s a great idea to spread their ways to what could be an impactful committee.
also, this is a very poor metric. zcash was too new, in 2017 to garner a large amount of outside dev interest ,and every year after that have been 100% nasty bearish. this will change in 2021.
side note - i’m not picking on you shawn. you’re one of my forum favorites. you just seem to be the only member of ZF that posts here often. would really like to hear what the never changing (majority unelected) ZF board members have to say.
I amended my post, there is nothing saying that the MGRC couldn’t choose be more proactive in the future.
Also please note that I don’t speak officially on behalf of the Foundation.
FWIW I don’t agree with this. This post declares the Zfnd’s intent to offer compensation to the MGRC from Zfnd’s own slice, which provides one way (perhaps incomplete) to sidestep whether the MGRC can fund itself or not. This post also doesn’t specifically say whether a grant from MGRC to MGRC to compensate themselves is allowable, just that it is not described in the ZIP (in my personal opinion such a loophole would amount to civil disobedience, which could be a prelude to changing the ZIP).
Personally (not speaking for the foundation as whole) I am pretty excited about the MGRC becoming an independent and effective organization. Especially after listening to all the candidate discussions, which make me think we’re tapping into a really excellent set of motivation, energy, competence, to make it happen.
Understood, I have removed that part my post since it seemed that I was speaking on behalf of the Zcash Foundation, my mistake. The Foundations blog post itself is self explanatory.