So you are against this then? Introducing Governance Committees - #37 by Seyed
I would argue that this is a positive effect. Everything in life is just a trade of services and its very good to get the right feedback on your services, so you can improve them.
Ya maybe that turns out to be the best idea. Im just sharing my thoughts about something i think is suitable for this project.
I don’t think this is a full time job. A small part time job. We are writing now in the forum just because we like it.
Read this proposal Introducing Governance Committees - #37 by Seyed
In there they describe this exakt payment amount for the new committees, 4 groups with 5 members each 20k for each group for 3 month work. No one is complaining about this pay being too little.
How much do you think they should get paid?
[quote=“diligit, post:20, topic:2977”]
I don’t support this proposal, it just complicates the governance process, and has no benefit to the ecosystem, the main purpose of this proposal is to hire 20 people (promoters) the need is not there, and that devalues delegates. And another purpose is excessive rewards for governance participants, it will be time for delegates and other voting participants to be rewarded, probably after the retroPGF launch.
This governance structure for Token House is not necessary, and certainly no secretaries and bosses are needed.
[/quote] and Why does it devalue delegates? It’s about giving delegates higher value. I would say that this system values Builders highest and delegates right after. Delegates would be able to monetize their work by charging the delegators a fee for there’s work.
Im even suggesting a top list of delegates so delegators will be able to choose more easy.