#Pay Council in Fuel next Epoch

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

oblique grotto
#

For the next Epoch, let's pay Council members in Fuel minted by the DAO.

This would save the DAO $279,000 annually while encouraging more players to join the Council. Paying in Fuel would help Council members stay engaged in the game, ideally attracting streamers, content creators, and dedicated community members who enjoy playing.

Illuvium needs a Council to be considered a DAO and we also need effective marketing—this approach kills two birds with one stone.

Here are a few questions to refine the change.

How much Fuel should each Council member receive per month?
How many Council members should there be?
Should we have one unified Council or keep IMC and ICC separate?
Should meetings be mandatory?
If a member misses three votes in the same Epoch, should they lose their position automatically (no VONC needed)?

I can't think of any more questions at the moment so I will leave it there.

I would love to hear your thoughts.

If this receives 25 upvotes I will take all the feedback from here and write up a GCCP Proposal.

glass lantern
#

Will paying people in fuel attract the type of senior professional the IMC will benefit from?

oblique grotto
glass lantern
#

I think a better option would be locked ILV and reducing Council Pay

#

Locked ILV encourages the IMC to ensure they're maximizing their return in the future
Locked ILV also pays seniors a decent comp for their time

oblique grotto
#

Jeremy was part of the Illuvium community and he was so good that Illuvium hired him. I would think they would hire someone like Jeremy instead of him just being on council.

glass lantern
#

Jeremy is definitely a senior professional with experience though, I'm not sure what his background was but he wasn't learning on the job once hired

oblique grotto
#

I know that is what I am saying

obsidian cloud
#

I think paying in Fuel could encourage Council members to stay more active and contribute to the long-term sustainability of the DAO. Additionally, the proposed questions and strategies could provide a good foundation for making the structure more efficient. Still, I believe that further discussion with the community could take these ideas to the next level.

    1. If a member misses three votes in the same Epoch, should they lose their position automatically (no VONC needed)?

It’s important for members to fulfill their duties. Therefore, it might make sense for a member to lose their position automatically if they miss three votes. However, giving the member a warning or an opportunity to provide an explanation could also be considered.

    1. Should we have one unified Council or keep IMC and ICC separate?

A unified council could help make the overall strategy more cohesive. After all, the roles and responsibilities are clear. Therefore, in a scenario where everyone is assumed to be success oriented for Illuvium's future, I believe a unified structure would be healthier than keeping them separate at this point.

oblique grotto
glass lantern
#

What about locked ILV + Fuel?

Let's say a senior professional earns $150 p/hour, how much fuel are we paying an individual for their time?

There has to be some form of reasonable comp if we want serious contributors right?

oblique grotto
#

the council member would list how much they want to be paid each month, which would again help stakers decide if they think you are worth the pay and would be happy to have you in a paid role on council

cedar dome
oblique grotto
#

My opinions:

How much Fuel should each Council member receive per month?
Between $200-500 in Fuel per month

How many Council members should there be?
I say 10-20. An expansion will allow for broader community representation and more diverse perspectives in governance and we would get more gamers playing Illuvium.

Should we have one unified Council or keep IMC and ICC separate?
One council

Should meetings be mandatory?
No. All communication will take place through governance channels. If Kieran needs to share information with the Council, he will schedule a meeting, and members who can attend will join. If a meeting cannot be recorded, attending members will share the information with those who were unable to participate

If a member misses three votes in the same Epoch, should they lose their position automatically (no VONC needed)?
Yes, there is no excuse to miss 3 votes.

dark turret
eager sundial
#

THE MOST important aspect of this proposal is being overlooked... I recognized it instantly! That is that it ensures that going forward, the DAO / Council will HAVE to be made up of actual players of the game.... No one accept dedicated longterm/permanent players of the game will become Council members.... I support this because it ENSURES that the council will be TRUE players and truly in it for the game, not the pay.

oblique grotto
flat nest
#

I feel like a broken record saying this again but if we paid in skins does it meet all legal and financial requirements?
Do we have to have a paid DAO with a token that can be used outside the ecosystem or is a volunteer or fuel gifted DAO enough.

Let's say it is. Is this a good idea.
At first glance it seems good however, more thought needs to be put into it. What impact will it have on the economy?

dark turret
livid mauve
#

Assuming you have automated Drone runs by next epoch, you just pay them in liquid? NFTs instead of tokens?

You actively hurt the players as you insert a relevant sum of assets that had no real cost to procure and people who possibly just want to sell them. This could reduce floor prices below what cost to get in Overworld/automated drone runs is for regular players, making trading/buying/selling a lot worse for them.

You also don´t necessarily save money, you might even lose more than you save due to the marketplace implications.

livid mauve
oblique grotto
# livid mauve Assuming you have automated Drone runs by next epoch, you just pay them in liqui...

Drone runs do make it easier to acquire assets but the council members would be providing a service to the DAO via voting, engagement, content creation, time spent keeping up with Illuvium information etc so I would say there is a "real cost" to procure assets. The significance of council selling assets could be debated but we shouldn't assume how they will act because we don't know. How would the DAO lose more than $279k annually because of marketplace implications?

livid mauve
#

There is no $ cost and the only way to get paid is selling those via fuel gotten assets at the currently liquid price, unless someone wants to hodl this would obv reduce the floor of assets.
If there isn’t enough liquidity to buy up all these assets it could reduce organic players, as like I described above they can’t sell assets in an organic market anymore. Loosing customers seems like a loss in revenue, is this more or less than this 279k number, crystall ball knows. It is certain you inflate the amount of NFTs you sell though, which reduces the value of them, as you don´t create more demand, you only create more supply.

The comparison shouldn’t be what currency you pay council but how much and what should they do for it.

Giving 100-200$ or so in fuel to them per month so they are incentived to engage with the ecosystem makes sense, but to put it in current numbers e.g. getting a t5 illuvial costs about 30cents, so without drone runs ICC council pay wouldn’t even be able to spend the time needed to spend all that fuel and with drone runs even an ICC salary would add roughly 5000 Tier 5 Illuvials to the marketplace.
Currently there isn’t enough demand for that to be sold.
So you pay them in illiquid NFTs and tank the floor for the ones who are playing and wanting to sell what they don’t need.

If NFTs are liquid then Illuvium would be in an amazing spot btw, if there is demand for the thousands of tier 5 illuvials council members would be putting on the marketplace.
The future with this much liquidity, where this doesn’t have negative implications for players seems not in sight though.

#

I also strongly think it isn’t wise to elect people and pay them in illiquid NFTs, very scary their decisions will be opted for other financial benefits, like we see in irl politics, or we had in council members in the past advocating for systems that would make them or their following money.

#

You also speed up bonding curve with this, idk the math on that obv, but this is bad for players.

Also to that "we shouldn´t assume how they will act part", we most certainly should assume what happens if they sell instead of holding, or do you suggest we just ignore downside risks?

oblique grotto
# livid mauve There is no $ cost and the only way to get paid is selling those via fuel gotten...

I get your overall point but I think you are forgetting that drone runs will most likely be more expensive than OW runs and definitely if you want to find a t5 Illuvial. Drone runs might end up costing the same as Beyond d1sks so $200-$500 a month won't buy many stage 3 drone runs in a month so you might be over estimating the added inflation of assets to the overall market because of council being paid in fuel.

oblique grotto
#

I am not saying the downside risk isn't there like you say I am just thinking that is not a good enough reason to discard the idea of paying in fuel. Unless we want to just dissolve the council which I would be in favor of. I think this is the best way to pay council. Adding the option of how you want to get paid to your nomination form I think is something we can add since like Nick says above we don't want to miss out on valuable addition if the community thinks they are worth ILV pay when voting

#

So instead of community or council setting pay the people nominating themselves tell us if they want fuel or ILV and how much per month and then let the community decide if they want that person on council

livid mauve
livid mauve
livid mauve
#

This is off topic, but if drone runs aren’t somewhat close in value to a decent Overworld player, they are a redundant product, no? They shouldn’t be more expensive than someone hiring scholars to play.
If they are then you essentially support the business case of hiring scholars to play Overworld and people who do click drone runs wonder why they get so much less $-value out of NFTs compared to what they spend looking at market value.
Don’t make drone runs with these imaginary whales that will buy for sure mindset and who don’t care for loosing money?, that failed before. Make it a good product lol.

rapid drum
livid mauve
#

If it is bought, also wouldn´t "save" money, I don´t like using save, as governments printing money isn´t saving money either though

rapid drum
livid mauve
bronze yew
#

seriously you better stop this DAO masquerade I feel like it's just wasted time we should just give our opinions on the game and trust the illuvium team to make the changes if necessary. Worst case scenario we will have just invested in a bad company...

livid mauve
oblique grotto
livid mauve
#

You could simply put more than vague guidelines into place, which forces people to do specific work or show specific skills, beyond "I got votes", "people didn´t vote me out" -> I get paycheck.

oblique grotto
#

So you want more guidelines in place for council members and staked ILV as pay?

#

Reduction in pay or no?

#

How will staking work? Rich is responsible for staking all council pay and then responsible for distributing it once unstaked or Rich sends funds and then the DAO has to trust that the council members will stake?

oblique grotto
livid mauve
#

I don‘t think having people vote on who should get paid how much makes sense at all.
If one votes for a person they should think they are capable of the job.
This doesn’t necessarily correlate with that person actively being able to provide value to Labs or the DAO.
If they would be, we wouldn’t discuss about pay reductions or removing the positions.

#

Staked pay would be the same as delayed pay compared to current system. (Minus rev dis I guess?)

I suggested people should stake tokens when elected or even be asked to stake some amount to even be able to run.
This mostly excludes people who don’t want to take that risk, could be a positive or exclude high level talent as well.

Taking monthly snapshots and paying them out later would be easy though.

#

I am sure Labs could outline what qualities they would want and what work could benefit them.
This can go the way of a normal proposal to change governance structure then.

#

See if it passes upvotes/council.

Big step away from this dirty politics shit, where you have people campaigning for votes with half truths and what not other bs.