I think it would help a great deal to define the structure of how we see the the MGRC looking.
As a voter I am struggling to see what the group would look like, as a candidate I am struggling to see where I would best fit in.
I think @Shawn has proposed the best structure outline so far.
I would like to see it amended. to be more like
2 MGRC “Admins/Managers” Full time positions
3 MGRC “Specialist” Part time positions.
Everyone receives the same compensation, however the specialists have half the time burden of the admins. This will hopefully allow them to keep working within their current positions. and fulfil any current contractual obligations to their current “employer”. (the admin positions are specialist positions too, but they will involve more admin work - the other half of the full time position.- call them managers if you don’t like the term admin.)
It would also allow candidates to get a reasonable idea of who they will be working with and what is expected of them. For example if this was to be like this I would probably want to do one of the admin positions, I have more time I can commit, I like the community aspect and can do milestone appraisals, etc. With this differential I can highlight the skills I think are most marketable for the position.
What do the other candidates think of this? if we can in principle agree a structure between us then it should help the voters ask appropriate questions and candidates to pitch a bit more to their strengths and what they can bring to the table.
I have a pretty in depth view of what I see each position requiring. with the the admins more handling the community side, working out what projects might need help. Milestone deliverables, etc. with the Specialist bringing a more specific skillset be it finance, in depth knowledge of zcash development, etc.
This wont be this clear cut and there will be significant overlap. it is just a starting point.
It would be great to get applicants feedback on this sooner rather than later.