There is a lot of talk right now in the main MGRC thread regarding compensation and related issues.
These are issues that are most likely to be decided at the ballot rather than prior, so in the interests for transparency I will lay out my position on this topic explicitly:
If elected to the MGRC I will vote for internal processes that:
-
Require 2-3 MGRC members to work full time (as outlined in this thread) - sourcing and meeting with applicants, reviewing applications, developing metrics and all the other work I previously talked about in the main thread:
-
Compensate MRGC members for that work. As wonderful as the mission is, missions don’t feed people and we need to establish that this committee is not just for those that are already wealthy or who already have secured positions within the ecosystem. If the community values diversity of thought, opinions and backgrounds then it is essential that MGRC members are paid for the work that they do, and is seen as a viable option to as many people as possible.
-
I will vote for processes that denote this compensation as a mixture of ZEC and/or ZEC futures to ensure that committee members have skin in the game.
-
Minimize the influence of ECC and ZF employees, associates and/or affiliates in the running of the MGRC. One of the primary goals of the MGRC is the decentralization the ecosystem, there are rightfully concerns within the community that capture of MGRC seats by such affiliates risks turning the MGRC into a proxy arena for the two incumbents in this space. It is vital that the MGRC establishes independence and primary accountability to the community.
I believe that all of the above are essential for the MGRC to be successful.