#GCCP-XX - Temporary Re-Allocation of Council Payment Funds to Community Streamers

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

floral turtle
#

Posted on behalf of the Sponsor

** Sponsor** = @potent harbor

Summary
This proposal seeks to temporarily pause council payments and redirect those funds to support active X (Twitter), YouTube, and Twitch streamers who are actively promoting and engaging with Illuvium. Given the shifting landscape of Web3 and crypto gaming, council responsibilities have changed, and community sentiment suggests that council payments currently yield minimal tangible benefits. This IIP proposes leveraging these funds to empower content creators who bring real-time engagement, education, and visibility to Illuvium.

Motivation
Inefficient Use of Treasury Funds
Council payments were originally designed for governance duties, but the evolving landscape means council members may not need compensation at prior levels.
Many passionate community members are willing to contribute without pay out of dedication to Illuvium.
Limited Perceived Community Representation
A growing sentiment suggests that the community feels underrepresented by the current council, and reallocating funds to content creators could provide more direct value.
Increasing Content, Engagement & Reach
Web3 gaming thrives on exposure. Streaming and social media engagement drive organic adoption.
Many Illuvium streamers struggle with sustaining content due to lack of resources.
Supporting streamers would help increase frequency, quality, and reach of Illuvium content, directly benefiting marketing and community growth.

Details
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-V561Y-fNwOp7PiElU3MG-Po-7zvovSxr9Q4u8wlbEs/edit?usp=sharing

Google Docs
IIP-XXX: Temporary Reallocation of Council Payment Funds to Communi...

IIP-XXX: Temporary Reallocation of Council Payment Funds to Community Streamers Summary This proposal seeks to temporarily pause council payments and redirect those funds to support active X (Twitter), YouTube, and Twitch streamers who are actively promoting and engaging with Illuvium. Given the ...

#

Note that since this impacts the pay of council members, I recommended it be presented as a GCCP

ICC will review prior to posting to github when/if the required upvotes are obtained to ensure it followed the correct steps in the voting process

ashen badge
#

if you wan't to incentivize content creators more shouldn't we change/build out IIP-59?

And create a proposal just about altering/pausing council payments?

#

Just realized Quants can't comment here 😄

violet fractal
# ashen badge if you wan't to incentivize content creators more shouldn't we change/build out ...

To alter or change council payments would be a GCCP. Which would go through the process in the form of a majority vote from both councils.

I could see an ICCP being used to then increase expenses in the area of influencer marketing. ICCP to revise IIP-59, following the normal process. That would separate the proposal into two though.

It may be best to separate the points like you mentioned. Council pay has been revisited in a number of proposals, so having a clear "red line" where we see council payment revision titles for the proposals will make it easier to look back and find the changes over time.

ashen badge
round flower
#

If the game is going to be changing drastically do we want to spend money on paying content creators to stream it right now?
Won't marketing budget be going towards that when the game is ready to be pushed?

ashen badge
spiral orbit
#

As I said when this was brought up, I think this is less about revenue generation in my head personally, the alliance program details @heady jetty could provide but they were not great at conversions or overall revenue generation, this applies to the creator rewards program too though. And I think you have to consider other reasons for this which I would say were related to things like onboarding, fiat on/off ramps, game state etc. I think this proposal more aligns to shift funds somewhere that we have people actively marketing Illuvium games. For example @mystic spruce @soft lava @turbid zealot @clear sand and several others that are dedicated to streaming daily but yet some may not be able to continue easily.

#

@sinful sluice streams often too, sorry if I forgot anyone else

round flower
#

I would like to see this as two different proposals.
The first being whether council is worth the money.
Only if the result on that is no should the next question of whether or not the money go to content creators be asked.

A couple of questions for the council members, who I assume are reading this.

  1. How many community members do you interact with in your DMs on a weekly basis?
  2. Are your interactions more with people who have been in Illuvium for 1+ year or are you fielding questions more from new community members?
  3. For legal reasons, how many council members do we need?
slow epoch
slow epoch
turbid zealot
# round flower I would like to see this as two different proposals. The first being whether co...

I can't say anything for the console members but as a small streamer/ content creator I stream to 5 different platforms (Twitch, X, Rumble, Kick, TikTok) and post VODs on YouTube. I have very few chatters if any, about 1 or 2 every other stream. The people who do end up chatting are usually people who have never seen illuvium and have questions and interest in illuvium. On average I get between 100 to 1,000 views between all platforms, most on X and TikTok. I also have 0 referral code inputs as far as I know. I do believe there is too much funding going to council. I'm not sure what to do with the extra funds if they are re-allocated. I do believe I am a fairly small streamer and those are the numbers I get. This is just my input for any comparison.

round flower
turbid zealot
slow epoch
# round flower I would like to see this as two different proposals. The first being whether co...

Is council worth the money?

  1. we dnt have much activity in discord or twitter. we no longer have many proposals to vote on. we prob dont have much stuff to discuss or govern.
    i personally can see some overlaps between the roles of IMC and ICC.

  2. after serving in ICC and IMC ive come to a conclusion that the primary function of a DAO is corporate income tax exemption. the question is whether we should still worry about this stuff, is it still relevant now that trump is in the office and he himself launched a memecoin.

  3. the dao is not registered anywhere and currently there is no plan to, therefore the IMC might be personally liable. the question if whether the IMC has a legal standing. does the IMC has direct control of the treasury and the use of the funds? does the IMC has control over Labs?

  4. i can go even further and ask:
    Do we still need the council at all? Do we still need to be a DAO at all?
    Take note that the DAO does not own the IP and who are the signers of the gnosis wallet?

sinful sluice
#

Fully for Re-allocating these payments, was always shocked to learn how much it is (admittedly don't really no what's involved). Assumed it was for tax reasons like Jag suggested above.

Not sure how it would work with re-allocating to content creators but I like the idea. For perspective, I'm maybe top 2 or 3 viewership on youtube over the last 1-2 years and my best month was $120 aud (excluding referrals, which for me hit payment threshold twice, think around $2.4k USD total). So wouldn't take much to make a streamer happy, I wouldn't complain at even $100 a month haha.

I do think a big key to success of gauntlet is having med-large TFT content creators streaming it, so I wouldn't be mad/offended if most/all of the funds went to achieving that

pine mauve
#

Fully agreed, council is pretty much the same people over and over again, voted in by the team and other whales around them, total waste of resources as little to no value is added to the team's decision making.

This proposal, if considered, should be implemented only when we have proven we have an increasing playerbase and stickiness, otherwise it would still be wasted on 50-100 viewers.

robust island
#

Rewarding content creator is essentially a marketing budget and right now with the game still delayed for the next couple months i dont see how this would be effective

Current state of the game effects everything and so council also has less thing to do as theres not much community activity and all time low ideas-feedback being thrown around

The whole DAO/council existence question is valid, but if the councils were to stay, i doubt it could be effective as a volunteer position tbh

The current alliance program is a very big opportunity for content creators but it only works as well as the game does so right now most everyone earns 0$

sinful sluice
#

Good argument to be made most game devs generally wouldn’t want a council at all, let alone paying one the equivalent of multiple employees

robust island
# sinful sluice Do you disagree with re-allocating at all or just to streamers?

I honestly doubt the effectiveness of a volunteers council. A lot of people doubt the council purpose when they get highly paid, imagine what it would look like if it was a free position

I wouldnt be against a reduction in pay though, something like 500$ for icc and 1500 for IMC sounds more appropriate to me

Right now its a dead time so it could in theory make sense to pause it, but you cant really pause the epoch, can you? Allocation to something else, like the example of content creator here also isnt justifiable imo because that sphere is also "dead" as the game is still delayed for couple months. Not only we wouldn't get a substantial amount of new people from those efforts but we actually dont want new people now because we want their first experience to be good

Council activity and tasks should pick right up as the game starts eventually, this down time is just natural and affects all sphere so i dont see any way we can act on it

sinful sluice
robust island
round flower
sinful sluice
round flower
#

I am putting a thumbs down on this.

I have been fairly outspoken over the last few months questioning what council does for us, what their roles are and what our expectations should be. I do think governance should be revisited. I don't like how much we pay out for what we get.

I understand that there is value in having people streaming and playing the game. Especially with this being Web3 and with Gauntlet's learning curve it would be a good thing to have someone knowledgeable answering questions from new people.
What I question is putting all the money from governance into that. Where is the cost/benefit analysis study showing that this is a good idea? How many people are you expecting to bring in? How much revenue would be generated? Will we be retaining more people? If we were to wait X number of months until the game is in a more final state how would those numbers be different? We don't have endless resources and need to ensure that our money is being spent as wisely as possible, these questions should be answered before signing off to do this.

spiral orbit
sinful sluice
floral turtle
#

Good evening Everyone!

I have been waiting to have the time to dedicate to this post since I personally feel I am in the best position to comment (more to follow why!)

I shared my initial sentiment with Quants right after posting this on his behalf that I strongly feel this should be two proposals:

  • A) Council Pay Reduction = Affects current renumeration structures (DAO operations and discretion of the DAO)
  • B) Marketing Incentive for dedicated streamers = Ties into existing Affiliate program (Illuvium Labs discretion on their Marketing spending & initiative)

**Mixing the two in a governance related manner seems to muddy the waters – I agree both have merit but combining A & B in the same proposal is where I believe the problem lies. I would ultimately “REJECT” this proposal if I was the one voting on it at ICC level. **

I am in favor of reducing Council Pay (ICC & IMC), as long as it is done in a strategic manner and have a process in place for consideration when the time comes to re-evaluate at a later date. Remember that I am the one behind the “IMC Renumeration Reduction” (GCCP-2) where IMC’s pay was reduced. This initiative was encouraged by constant feedback from the Community that current council was being paid too much and this was a justified way to reduce IMC pay (since VARA requirements was removed).

I personally worked very hard this epoch, and my peer evaluation/feedback from my fellow council members holding me in high praise certainly speaks volumes. When nominating for this epoch, I justified the minimum required hours (10-15 per week and usually going above that) based around the pay received – which is around minimum wage where I live.

I am all for reducing Council pay (no backlash from me) and to take the time to re-assess and determine what value (if any) is justifiable or if the role needs to be changed to volunteer-based since there are many dedicated members of the community.

.

#

This would become like a “Community Committee” where they would be able to represent the community and ensure they have a voice in DAO decisions.

One of the Council’s main responsibilities is to do what’s best for the DAO and if reducing pay will assist in this, then there should be minimal opposition.

__The work needs to justify the pay and the pay needs to justify the work. __

**With that said, here is some Alpha, I submitted my resignation from ICC last week and we are currently in a transition period. ** I have nothing to gain in my rationale or comments that follow this message, since I will no longer be receiving any Council pay regardless of the outcome of this proposal.

If this proposal was split and there was a “GCCP-3 – Reduce All Council Pay”, I would be in favor if the following were included:

  • Council Pay should be reduced by 50% to 100% for ICC & IMC and re-evaluated at the end of the epoch prior to nominations for Epoch 11; This will allow 3 months to determine if the work output was affected or remained the same; This will be when a revised proposal should be prepared if required;
  • Note that if current council members decide to walk and resign due to lack of pay, there is minimal candidates that ran last epoch available to take the empty seats on Council. This would force a "snap-election" to fill the seats at the tail end of this epoch. This statement would only apply for Epoch 11: “the presence of willing unpaid contributors minimizes this risk” since we will see who nominates knowing pay is “0%” / Volunteer-based
  • Epoch 11 nominations will show what community members are willing to nominate for 0% to 50% of the current pay. If the pool of candidates is too low willing to work for free (Volunteer), than there needs to be a contingency in place to have the pay reviewed and promptly updated to expand the pool of candidates.
#
  • The final 4 months of this epoch + 8 months into Epoch 11 will allow the 12months for review; I feel this should be every quarter to better map whatever criteria is deemed important to track in making the decisions to modify (increase or decrease) Council pay.
  • There is always work to be done, and the problems pointed-out will not be solved: 1) The community feeling underrepresented by current council; 2) The amount of time and work put into governance responsibilities. Using myself as an example, I nominated knowing that I would be putting 10 to 15 hours in based around the pay, would I still be motivated to work as hard at 50% - 100% reduction = Probably not. With that said, this is my personal opinion and i cannot speak on behalf of other council members, but wanted to share this sentiment.

===============================

As for the Marketing Allocation for streamers, as many pointed out, just because you are streaming does not mean that it benefits Illuvium. Any decision for fund allocation for marketing efforts need to show tangible results or else they will be axed and removed.

Right now is still early and the Illuvium Team has made it very clear they do not want to spend marketing $$$ at this point until the product (Gauntlet for instance) is in a more polished state. The affiliate program rewards the content creators that bring new SPENDING players in the ecosystem by receiving a % of the money spent – this is a solid system and encourages content to be made. Otherwise, why not allocate spending to professional streamers or content creators that have more reach? (No offence meant, I know there is value in having capable and well-versed creators that know the games inside and out since it adds tremendous value!)

Anyways – Sorry for the long messages!

slow epoch
round flower
# sinful sluice I think its easy to argue the cost benefit for streamers/guilds is way more than...

I think council should always have been a volunteer position. We should have had people in who were financially or mentally (preferably both) so involved in Illuvium that it was in their best interest for it to succeed and therefore they donated their time to it.

I don't think this should be a question of whether streamers are more effective than council. I think the question should be, "Is the community getting the value paid for council?" If the majority think no then the money should be put back into the Illuvium budget. Then we could ask, "What should this money be spent on that will best help Illuvium succeed?"

Taking council money and spending it on streamers if the majority feel that streamers do more than council is the wrong way of thinking imo. We need to be asking if paying streamers at this time is the absolute best way to spend Illuvium's money. We have to make decisions based on what is best, not just "this is better than we have now". Maybe streamers are the best way to spend it or maybe we should only be using a partial amount of that money on streamers, or maybe none. That is why I am asking about a cost/benefit analysis to get some actual data. We have had team numbers shrink as the team works on saving money. Should we be spending any money on council or streamers right now? That is what I am asking.

I am your subscriber on YT. I know you bring a lot of valuable information about Illuvium. I am not downplaying that in any way. I just want to be cautious about how we spend at this time.

round flower
slow epoch
#

you can ping the team yourself

#

why do u need a middleperson

round flower
slow epoch
#

we can create threads too

#

let me lay it out.
mostly what happened in council meeting:

  1. IMC meet with kieran to ask for updates.
  2. ICC meet up to discuss what happened in IMC meeting.
  3. rich post the minutes
  4. ICC ask community questions using a form, team answers
    it's basically just communication
#

Small part of it is real discussion on strategy or proposal voting

round flower
#

Maybe what we need is a Discord secretary rather than a large council. Someone to start a thread, read through all the fluff to find the questions, hand those off to the team. Get answers from team and relay them back.

slow epoch
#

exactly, u just need 1 person to do that instead of 9

#

the way i see it council role is more advisory. imo the value comes when the team wants to do something, they have consulted the community or supported by the community

floral turtle
slow epoch
#

really depends, like i said, imo the main role is corporate tax exemption

#

im not a corporate lawyer nor tax consultant, so idk

round flower
slow epoch
#

yea thats up to the community to decide.
we can try to make it as a volunteer position but maybe for next epoch because there is personal legal risk involved in this position.

#

plus u need to be doxxed

round flower
#

Yeah, not everyone would want either of those

turbid zealot
#

I am for at least a deduction of pay. I think a full removal of pay might be a little too aggrieve immediately but maybe eventually. I do say this not knowing exactly what is fully expected of the council and if a position opens up because of changes I would gladly fill in as a volunteer if I meet the requirements to be on council. I just want to see illuvium succeed. I have been here for almost 4 years and plan to show support how ever I can.

sinful sluice
pine mauve
#

I think there is definitely a use case for council, if it works properly. Labs are a new team, without experience in this field, prone to making questionable decisions sometimes, especially around gameplay features. Many of the mistakes we did could have been avoided, if we had a fully working council being able to support labs. But having Kieran in the IMC makes it pointless, as the council is supposed to represent the dao in front of labs. And there is a conflict of interest being in both.

You don't need to be a game dev in order to know what it takes to be on the right track. Warframe, game with over 10 years on the market, appointed their Community Manager as a Creative Director - fully in charge of the vision and future of the project.

If the council is to stay, it should be transformed to work properly and independent of labs, to support labs. Otherwise if it's gonna continue as it is, better to fully shut it down and let labs do their thing.

spiral orbit
sinful sluice
# pine mauve I think there is definitely a use case for council, if it works properly. Labs a...

doesn't your example show hiring someone like a community manager (lets make Rich creative director lol) do better than a dao/council? i think the argument is what is the best way to gather and impliement feedback. Listening to a recent ama from ravenquest he got asked the question if they would consider a dao and he was a hard no saying there is no examples of it working and there is just some things the community cant know the full picture ect

pine mauve
# sinful sluice doesn't your example show hiring someone like a community manager (lets make Ric...

Well the example was that a community manager now leads the project and vision of an OG game, so it doesn't have to be someone with PhD in game design, just someone with enough knowledge and passion.

Whether it's integrated into the team or it functions as a separate entity/council, I don't see much difference, except being on labs forces you to follow their rules while being on council can give you more freedom to have an impact where it's needed.

slow epoch
sinful sluice
sinful sluice
pine mauve
sinful sluice
pine mauve
# sinful sluice interesting, I always thought labs listens too much to the community. Need more ...

It's not exactly black and white. Labs do listen to the community, but on smaller topics and/or usually after something goes to shit. Now I'm not saying the "community" is always right or that labs are always wrong. But certain things could have been avoided easily if we had a proper council structure or if the feedback was taken into account on time.

I'm not aware of the team not following their vision because of the dao. Can you provide any examples?

sinful sluice
pine mauve
sinful sluice
pine mauve
#

Agree to disagree. I'd rather it be ego than incompetence. In the end who knows/cares, point is mistakes could have been avoided like launching the 3 games with 0 demand for your product as an example of one. It's also something the council should have stepped in for.

sinful sluice
pine mauve
# sinful sluice Didnt the community want all games launched together?

What does it mean 'the community'? There are thousands of different perspectives in a community. Most are clueless tbh. What matters is taking the right decision, among many. There was some feedback against it, I tried pitching in as well, but it's hard to get any sort of negative feedback heard in time, that's my point. We were suffering greatly from toxic positivity up until not too long ago. Any attempt at being critical on anything was immediately shut down as fudding.

sinful sluice
pine mauve
# sinful sluice i feel like i recall lots of negative feedback about not launching things togeth...

I feel you argue for the sake of argue. I don't recall lots of negative feedback for not launching things together, there was some for it and some against it. Then it's leadership's job (labs+imc) to filter through all that, and take a final course of action.

The problem was moreso that the team released a hard date for launch, and did not want to not go through with that promise. But first, who came up with that deadline, based on what factors? And second, it should have been considered taking the L not hitting the hard deadline, until the product is ready cause otherwise the blowback can be worse than not keeping your deadline, which it was.

If you want to replace Kieran with someone else, just say so, or what do you mean by this 'person'?

sinful sluice
# pine mauve I feel you argue for the sake of argue. I don't recall lots of negative feedback...

They considered taking the L and changing deadline for sure. You can say it was a bad decision but you cant say they didnt listen/consder it imo. Also delaying it and having it a bit better but still failing could have meant less time to pivot. Than you get a different group saying "should have launched sooner why didnt you listen to me!", thinking they are right because of the failure.

No idea what you mean by replacing kieran, i think his great. I was talking about hiring an employee to do similar job as council

lost mural
# floral turtle Posted on behalf of the Sponsor ** Sponsor** = <@132203833257492481> **Summar...

This proposal brings up 2 main points one is that some of the community believe the council pay is not worth.

2 there should be an incentive program outside of the alliance program for content creators.

I think this should be two different proposals and I also don't think they benefit the Dao.

1st: should council pay be removed? We already made measures when we approved the last GCCP reducing IMC pay. To my understanding of the financial benefits of remaining decentralized depends on having a Paid multi layer governance structure. If we removed that we lose the ability and tax benefits from being a DAO. Which out weigh the cost of the council members cumulatively. This is why we kept the ICC when we reverted from epoch 8.

2nd. Should we just fund streamers and content creators when we get basically no traffic? I think even if we look at the biggest and most consistent streams they barely get above 10 viewers. As a content creator my self I could benefit but I don't think it will extend the reach in a meaningful way and the CAC will be higher and retention very low. The game is not in a position where I think a program like this is beneficial. Maybe in April or later, but that is for the ILV marketing team to decide. I don't think we need to make a proposal for this.

I understand its been a frustrating and sad few months as it seems little progress is moving in the game. There have been some major pivots and they will take time to integrate. Gauntlet wasn't even in dev over a year ago. We still don't have multiplayer servers, scouting and several important features that are key to bringing the game out of the shadows.

And if anyone thinks I am just in it for the council money, I actually stepped down from IMC Liaison during the last IMC meeting. Not because I was being pressured by anyone, but I actually wanted someone who could provide more time commitment as Polemos is starting to ramp up and I can't dedicate as much time for it.

pine mauve
# sinful sluice They considered taking the L and changing deadline for sure. You can say it was ...

I'm sorry but what you say makes no sense, to me at least. Releasing the full ecosystem without any demand for your product is indefensible, I don't care what any other group is saying, it was just a bad decision. It doesn't take a genius to see that. Now Kieran/team or whoever takes this decision could be over worked, under pressure, under stress whatever, that's where the council should have also stepped in. But since the council is also ran by Kieran, it is totally useless and unable to perform it's purpose. What results do you expect to see from it?

What difference is it gonna make if you hire an employee to do a similar job as council or keep the council exactly? Current and ex council members have said they have 0 power in decision making or in anything whatsoever. So either make changes that make the council not useless or remove it altogether, that's the point I was making.

sinful sluice
pine mauve
# sinful sluice releasing zero at the same time as OW wasn't anywhere at the top of my list of w...

I didn't mean zero, I meant launching the 3 games without any use case for the illuvials. Half-baked-later-scrapped Ascendant, 2 weeks uber early alpha of gauntlet, no leaderboards, no album/collection where you fill in your creatures, absolutely no reason why anyone should play the game, even if ow was top notch. What results did we expect other than the ones we got?

And on your second point, it doesn't matter what other studios do or on what position you hire the 'person' if his feedback is not gonna be taken into account.

sinful sluice
pine mauve
#

You are a good and a kind soul my friend, dont ever change. Laters 🖖

sinful sluice
gaunt flame
#

Seems the topic has brought up some good points already and with the risk of repeating what has already been said here, Ill throw my 2 cents into it.

The first issue isnt about if Council is getting paid too much. Its a question of is the DAO getting its moneys worth which boils down to a misalignment of expectations from the Council vs what is written in our governance documents.

The current pay structure covers multiple points being 1) Incentivize talent; 2) Make it worth the time vs the risk; 3) Commensurate the work demanded from the responsibilities and duties of the position.

  1. Lowering the pay would highly disincentivize talent who would have the expertise that would be necessary to exercise the functions of the roles. We often forget that this isnt a government, this is a business. We need people who can make business decisions and not political ones. People who can leverage their expertise, connections, and knowledge to arrive at business decisions that will allow this project to become profitable. Lowering the pay would not make it enticing to the type of people we want to attract.

  2. Its public knowledge that the DAO is not registered anywhere and what this means is that those who make the decisions can and would likely be made personally liable in any future suits. The current pay would not even cover all the legal expenses should this happen.

  3. Clearly, theres a misalignment with whats expected from a council member and the answer to this is not to lower pay but to revise the governance document and expand on the duties and responsibilities of a council member in both IMC and ICC. I wholeheartedly agree if this is the case but at the same time, it would be egregious to also believe that the position is a full-time position. There has to be a balance.

On the second issue regarding increasing marketing. I think it is too early to consider this let alone trying to fund streamers. As many have pointed out, our game is not in a great state to market out wide. We will just find ourselves in an echochamber. We had an influencer program and evolved and evolved but without a stable fun game to keep the momentum.... We just throw away money with no real retention.

At the same time, we outsourced marketing to Labs. So I would like Labs to chime in on potential marketing initiatives in the next months. Keeping in mind that the DAO needs to be mindful of its spend as well. Were in a bad situation in the whole crypto market so any unnecessary spending should not be entertained at this point in time.

Side note: Jag has been talking about why we need a council. We are a decentralized autonomous organization. We need to ensure that our current governance structure wont be considered a company. Probably the better question would be, do we want to continue being a DAO?

Lastly, topic of Council pay has its cycles. This is probably its 5th or 6th cycle already. I understand it hits harder now cause of the current token price. But again, I implore the DAO look not at lowering the pay. Look into extracting value out of it by expanding the duties and responsibilities of the council for it to be commensurate.

dense egret
#

In my humble opinion I believe that being a DAO is essential in the web3 space. While some may argue that we may not need a DAO, specially with the game's interest being at a ATL, the situation could change dramatically in the future. If things go well and we see a surge in players numbers there'll be a consequent increase in the DAO's engagement.

One key issue I’d like to address is the lack of meritocracy in the council. Currently, we have council members making decisions in areas where they have zero expertise, and I believe this has been one of the DAO’s biggest pitfalls.

If the council is truly meant to represent the community, its members should have the qualifications necessary to make informed, high-stakes decisions.

Additionally as @gaunt flame said, I agree that cutting the council’s pay isn’t the solution to improving its effectiveness. Instead, we should focus on finding better ways for council members to contribute meaningfully to the community and to the game's success.

sinful sluice
# dense egret In my humble opinion I believe that being a DAO is essential in the web3 space. ...

Isn't the way it all works fundamentally flawed in regards to the qualifications/competence? eg mentally unstable people being voted in previously + only qualifications being life long gamer. eg apparently the most competent pick not being voted in this cycle.

"Instead, we should focus on finding better ways for council members to contribute meaningfully to the community and to the game's success." This sounds very reasonable

slow epoch
slow epoch
#

i was expecting that the IMC can monitor Labs :

  1. view only access to JIRA project management
  2. budgeting
  3. 3rd party audit
#

we dnt even know how labs is spending the $1m budget

#

on salary

spiral orbit
# gaunt flame Seems the topic has brought up some good points already and with the risk of rep...

I mean to be frank you’re hardly active ser… do you think the amount you’re receiving from the DAO in ILV is more deserved than some of the core contributors? You say it’s a misalignment in expectations, did you do what was expected of you? Do you feel good about the effort put in? The only IMC member the community regularly hears from is jaganite, scoriox,or Kieran. The only way to get ahold of the rest of you is directly ping you. And you’re even supposedly building out Illuvium adjacent things, but no one would hardly know or see this based on what I see.

#

This isn’t to pick on scrubs either, I think the same could be said about others on IMC as well.

#

Like just take a glance at who participated in this thread

#

From councils

#

And then tell me I’m wrong

#

It’s no secret Illuvium has been downsizing to preserve runway. And it pains me to see great people have to be let go but council that no one hears from or sees doing anything positive for Illuvium collect paychecks while they are unfortunately put out.

floral turtle
#

25 Upvotes Met 👍

gaunt flame
# spiral orbit I mean to be frank you’re hardly active ser… do you think the amount you’re rece...

Lots to unpack here. Ill try to address each one.

Lets start with:

do you think the amount you’re receiving from the DAO in ILV is more deserved than some of the core contributors?

First of all, I dont think the current reduced pay of council is close to the pay of core contributors. And rightly so. At one point the average pay of Labs employees was 10k usd. What im driving at here is that theres no comparison and unnecessary. This discussion was for lowering pay of council then moving it to community streamers. DAO has in its all history never had a say in the pay of core contributors. So if theres any discontent with pay, then that should be taken up with Labs management.

Its important also to note that pay of Labs is derived from the raised VC funds while pay from council comes from the ILV treasury.

did you do what was expected of you?

If we are to base it off the governance documents. Yes and Ive done more than whats expected and others have as well. And as you even said, theres a lot of things I and even the other IMC members does that arent seen. Is the only metric now of a good council member purely about how visible one person is?

I mean to be frank you’re hardly active ser

I admit that I could make more attempts at being active. But I would always put in my two cents in issues that I believe I can add value into. Council is a unit. When certain members already chimed in and given inputs that has been shared or aligned with the rest of the council then adding into it is just merely playing the political visibility game. At least thats how I see myself.

It’s no secret Illuvium has been downsizing to preserve runway. And it pains me to see great people have to be let go but council that no one hears from or sees doing anything positive for Illuvium collect paychecks while they are unfortunately put out.

I touched on this a bit above. Labs is its own entity with its own management. The decisions to cut including how many and who were not DAO decisions. Ive gone through several retrenchments and redundancies in my career outside of Illuvium. And I agree... its never an easy decision but its definitely a needed one to survive. Even if you make council pay 0, this will have 0 effect with the downsizing of Labs. As mentioned, the pay for either are separate and has no direct correlation.

On that note, I recently had a frank discussion with my peers and I have advocated even from the very beginning of the drafting of Governance V2 that we just have too many people/councils. I would rather go back to the original 5 person IMC and allow it to absorb the duties and responsibilities of the ICC. If we want to reduce spend on council, this is where I would start.

And before you or anyone might think that Im trying to protect my "pay". Even if you lower the amount or even completely remove it. That wont stop me from wanting to be a part of the DAO as council. I want this project to succeed as much as anyone and it might be conceited of me to say but I truly believe that I still have value to give to this project regardless if I would be compensated for it or not.

As a last note, it sucks that this whole thing is just becoming about visibility and making it political. The current standard now is to be seen in chat or in social media. Ive seen how people who have strived to do more be shunned by the very people they work hard for.

gaunt flame
slow epoch
#

or at least improve investors confidence

#

remember, we are 10 epochs in. has the "DAO" system been successful in steering the project?

#

aside from providing corporate tax exemption

gaunt flame
#

Sounds like you wanna remove our DAO status

slow epoch
#

sounds like im asking good questions

gaunt flame
#

Those are operational questions. And to be straightforward, how do we increase revenue? make the game better so that theres better retention. Fix the economy which Labs is supposed to roll out. Lower spend so that the road to profitability is shorter (again labs is actively doing).

Can the DAO through its council steer the project better? Thats something I hope we can improve for sure.

proud vale
#

If the community wants to defund council, I think it's the wrong way to go about things, but if we were to proceed that way, we should also pull most of the powers from council. I have very little confidence that we'll find a full council of 5 competent members who are willing to take on risk on behalf of the DAO for $0.

This also shouldn't be a conversation about removing council pay to reallocate to streamers. If council isn't worth the money, that doesn't need to be in comparison to funding streamers. We already have marketing mechanisms in place to provide funding to streamers, and if we need more or better mechanisms, those should be evaluated independently of whether or not council provides value.

You can count on one hand the number of games which can attribute success to content creation. It's like, Among Us and Fall Guys, and it can be argued that both of those games were already good games. Games succeed when they hook players, content creation is a snowball effect for good games, and mostly irrelevant for games few people are playing. Consequently, I don't believe that reallocating council pay to content creators will make a tangible difference in player adoption.

At any rate, I'd like to see this governance decision decoupled from what should be a marketing decision.

slow epoch
#

make the games better for better retention: we dnt design the games, we dnt code or do any modeling, we dont test the patches. we dont even do marketing.

fix the economy: the design and proposal came from labs. the implementation is done by labs.

lower spends: we dont even know how labs spend on each games or departments, nor we can tell them which part to reduce

slow epoch
spiral orbit
#

but yes probably should be separate

dense egret
# slow epoch wht kind of expertise ru looking for

If I were to design the DAO structure, it would be as follows:

The ICC would have a total number of members proportional to the community size. For this epoch, 2–3 ICC members would be more than enough. ICC would be responsible for maintaining direct communication with the community and would be required to write IIPs based on community input instead of being the community members writing the IIPs themselves.

The IMC would have its members divided into specific areas of expertise:

  • Economic Council
  • Marketing Council
  • Gaming Council
  • Engineering/Technical Council
  • Kieran as the lead IMC member and the bridge between the team and the council.
#

the recent fuel overhaul has been particularly frustrating for me. The fact that it is being done behind closed doors in coordination with the council (which lacks expertise in designing such systems) instead of through an open IIP to get community feedback, completely goes against how I envision open development for a web3 game like Illuvium.

round flower
#

" Lowering the pay would highly disincentivize talent who would have the expertise that would be necessary to exercise the functions of the roles."

"Even if you lower the amount or even completely remove it. That wont stop me from wanting to be a part of the DAO as council. I want this project to succeed as much as anyone and it might be conceited of me to say but I truly believe that I still have value to give to this project regardless if I would be compensated for it or not."

@gaunt flame which is it? Seems to me if we got rid of pay we would still have people who are willing to use their strengths to help Illuvium succeed. People who want the project to make it for their own personal reasons - financial, emotional, ego, etc.

gaunt flame
round flower
slow epoch
#

Council Reform

#

👀

slow epoch
brazen blade
brazen blade
#

I want to second Blickter here overall and add, from a content creator's point of view, that due to low incentives, low sentiment, poor metrics, and Illuvium not being well-received in the Web3 space overall, it currently feels not worth investing a lot of time in this 'unpaid internship' of creating content—only to be rewarded later when a big update hits or something similar happens, as there is lots of uncertainty about the when to optimistic ones and the if to pessimistic ones.
Further obv ILV competes on getting creators with other games or web3 ways of monetizing content.

I think it is even the opposite, it is easy to get positive engagement and impressions of showing cringe overly optimistic posts/comments by ILV-Community or talk about ILV not doing well.
Lots of people either sold being down, or have other bags, so they like to hear that more, just how it is atm.

Alliance program is incredibly good if there would be high revenue, even then it is very high risk, high reward compared to more stable options in the space as well.
I don´t think ILV had something that was a stable non cheatable reward thing to attract creators yet to my knowlegde (old program was very easy to rank in with almost worthless short form content to farm impressions e.g., not a good roi for DAO, but was good for creators who wanted to spam short form clips no matter the retention form them)

(Speaking from the perspective of someone who creates content for a living, not as a hobby.)

In the end, it comes back to you need a game, that people want to play for entertainment, then creating content and engaging with the community is fun and rewarding.
This artificial rewards stuff can get you content and creators, but to make it worth for them, it might not be worth the pay, especially such small sums like council pay will rather be shift money from Council to the few who create content atm rather than get new creators imo.

brazen blade
#

Maybe a fair note as well, the current council pay/election structure is very good for content creators, but on the high risk high reward side, similar to Alliance Program.
Council and the low time commitment, close to 0% chance to lose the job and arguably high pay are a very good reward and incentive for creators.

Asking community to get 1 token and stake + vote is also "cheaper" support of a creator than gifting subs/donations.
vilv is obv cheatable metric as well, but less than impressions or even sign ups through links.

#

Nothing against F4eth here—just trying to objectively state things. He is a good example of a content creator essentially being paid via the council to create content, with the community agreeing on it as they declined the VoNC.

So the current system does to some extent accomplish what this proposal wants to do already.

slow epoch
proud vale
# slow epoch what power does the council exactly has?

Decision making power for the DAO. As you know, the DAO contracts Labs to develop games, and has additionally delegated operational responsibilities to Labs. This includes managing the multisig for the Treasury, etc. This system was pretty much 100% necessary historically when we had 3 or 6 month epochs - Changing signers every 3 month would be awful, and even with longer epochs, there's still substantial risk that 1 or 2 members of council could have their wallets compromised, in conjunction with a bad actor, and drain the Treasury. Council could change this, if they were inclined. Council's voting record historically doesn't inspire a lot of confidence that they would be available when needed to sign, however, and I don't personally believe this would improve anything.

I'll flip this question around - What powers is the council missing? What initiatives has council been trying to accomplish that it has been unable to due to a limitation of their powers? We do have limitations on council's ability to act without the approval of the community, but that is in place deliberately, and not something the community seems to have an issue with. It helps mandate communication from the council to the community, especially in scenarios where a proposal may be contentious.

I'd contend that if the choice of council has been to wait for updates from Labs on development, discuss those updates, and to vote on community sourced proposals, that is a choice the council has made. It's not the only choice available.

slow epoch
# proud vale Decision making power for the DAO. As you know, the DAO contracts Labs to develo...

can the dao enforce the decisions made? or enforce passed proposals? what is the punitive or termination terms of this contract?
We both signed the same one i assume?

about the treasury, dont you think the risk of compromised wallet of an admin is similar to imc members?
as for bad actors, yea it's a pretty hard topic.

i have requested a few things from labs that has been denied:

  • view only access to their JIRA
  • drilled down salary expense

as for a 3rd party audit ill prob make a proposal on it

fresh arrow
#

Is it expensive/difficult to hold a dao vote with vilv? Could that be used for all future proposals instead? I feel thats a way better implementation of the dao. I don't think the council salary is justifiable if illuvium labs are cutting staff costs internally...If i could send fuel to support content creators i would ^_^ and i'd volunteer to tackle some council tasks for free/pro bono. Although maybe my talent and experience isn't up to par 😉 ❤️

slow epoch
fresh arrow
slow epoch
#

ive never admin for snapshot but i reckon it's technically feasible.
as for jup dao, they incentivise people to stake and vote with token

fresh arrow
ashen badge
#

Based on real world experience, where every Citizen can vote in proposals i wouldn't recommend such a System. It has many flaws, where the major flaw being that for every "proposal" there is just a super minority in the population having the knowledge to actually vote on it. Which results in every proposal being voted on by basically uneducated people.

#

One can argue it's a "fair" System, but it's in my opinion not the best System moving forward into a bright future

fresh arrow
ashen badge
#

you just minimize the problem you have basically...

fresh arrow
#

Maybe if there wasnt any remuneration for council members this topic wouldnt be as contested and discussed so much and left open for any community member to contribute and for vilv to progress it thats all 🙂 i'm confident many of the elected members would still be active in the community like they where before they where elected without remuneration...

violet fractal
# ashen badge Indeed they are. The advantage of voting a council is that people can vote in co...

Community would likely look towards influencers to catch up on governance related subjects as well. Rather than speak to team or a committee to gain insights.

And as we know, influencers can then spin or have their own interpretation of the going ons, and thereby (unintentionally) misinform the public.

A council would gain more accurate information on top of being voted in because they have this "needed education"

ashen badge
fresh arrow
#

Is that bad if its the majority tho? If 1 million followers want x implemented in illuvium vs 12 governance experts i kinda wanna please the masses?

#

And that 1 million followers bought 1 ilv and staked it to vote for vilv to progress x?

#

Or have the council just dont pay them? Then this topic wouldnt exist?

violet fractal
violet fractal
ashen badge
#

In general everywhere, you want the best man for the job.
This should aply for governance aswell.
And in my opinion that won't be the case if everyone has a say. 🙂

fresh arrow
#

I emphasise this is my opinion***

slow epoch
ashen badge
ashen badge
#

we had that too with our current system of councils being voted in if i remember right.
We were just glad that people forgot about it.

violet fractal
slow epoch
violet fractal
#

No, i do agree that the current system could be exploited. Both systems, public vote and small council have pro's and cons.

fresh arrow
ashen badge
fresh arrow
#

Implementing an education system worldwide? I've lost track haha

slow epoch
fresh arrow
#

Was it due to poor education?

slow epoch
#

we never done one. i wouldnt say bad, but more like the opposite.
the closest we had probably F4E's VoNC

fresh arrow
pine mauve
# fresh arrow Is that bad if its the majority tho? If 1 million followers want x implemented i...

It is extremely bad indeed, as most people don't have the insight to look a few steps ahead and look over their personal bias. A franchise like Diablo was completely ruined for listening to the majority of the "community" instead of it's hardcore base, which was a much smaller %. There are more examples too if you'd like.

There needs to be an entity responsible for that, voting and making decisions based on the popular opinion is often a recipe for disaster.

fresh arrow
# pine mauve It is extremely bad indeed, as most people don't have the insight to look a few ...

Thanks, yeah some may argue that the Diablo franchise is still a popular and successful game though? I think Elon even plays it ""apparantly"" rofl but I understand your point. I suppose if a proposal was put forward to abolish all IMC and ICC payments until x point has been achieved where it is sustainable. Is it determined by the obviously biased in this situation currently elected council members or would a vILV vote be better? I think currently it would be the voting elected members @violet fractal if that's correct? But i suppose in the next re-election vILV voters have there say once again.... its kind of a situation thats impossible to be perfect 😦

pine mauve
# fresh arrow Thanks, yeah some may argue that the Diablo franchise is still a popular and suc...

Yeah Diablo is still popular, cause blizzard made it. There are cool stuff around it, but the essence of the game and it's gameplay is completely ruined. You can read non paid reviews of it, it sucks for many reasons, some which started with Diablo 3 and somehow carried over to diablo 4 10years later.

I've shared my opinion on the current council structure. Because of the way it's candidates are voted in and it's structure, I believe it's pretty useless. With it's current format it's better not to have any voting power and the team to handle everything (it's already that pretty much).

That being said I do believe council can work but some reform is necessary.

But big No from me to everyone voting on stuff, I'd rather have no vote at all if that's the case.

violet fractal
fresh arrow
pine mauve
fresh arrow
cerulean junco