@Thyborg thanks for sharing the above. Please response to questions in bold
Why?
To achieve proposal vote outcome by January 1, 2025:
- On-chain proposal must go live ~December 16th
- Forum discussion would be limited to 5 days
- This is substantially shorter than our standard 14-day discussion period
Additionally:
- The voting period spans the holiday season (December 24 - January 1)
- Community engagement is typically minimal during this time
- Even the Hydro team likely has reduced activity during holidays
Given the above –
What specific development or “product work” requires Jan 1st clarity?
How would a Jan 15th decision materially impact product progress, especially during a traditionally quiet period when contributors aren’t working anyway?
So, if I understand the proposal correctly, your budget assigns a $100K overhead cost per person/FTE. Sounds excessive.
- “Margin” represents a ~44% markup on $225k salary
- For a 6-person team, this amounts to $600K in “margin” costs alone
Given that:
Informal is an established company with
- Existing operational infrastructure
- Revenue streams
- Substantial grant support from ICF
- Private investment
Why should the Hub pay Informal’s tax bill and other operating costs?
Imo, the cp should pay for direct project costs (% FTE salaries, project-specific expenses) – not costs related to your operating structure. For this reason, #839 was a bad funding precedent – bc the hub pays a non trivial Informal “tax” whenever Informal funding is involved.
You say operational costs (legal, HR, finance) are covered by the “overhead margin.”
Yet, you also also say: “entire overhead margin will be paid out in ATOMs.”
This doesn’t make sense.
If your “margin” actually covers overhead costs (e.g., employer taxes, employee benefits, legal, HR, finance) these are typically paid in fiat or stables.
- Isn’t this just creating an extra conversion step since these operational costs must ultimately be paid in fiat?
- Why introduce ATOM/USD volatility risk for regular operating expenses?
How does paying the “margin” in ATOM “create alignment” when salaries are paid in fiat/USDC?
Best practice STRONGLY suggests that on-chain proposals seeking funding should ONLY proceed after:
- The receiving entity is properly formed and KNOWN
- Legal structure/wrapper is finalized
- Domicile (and jurisdiction) is established
Submitting a $1.2 million funding request without a properly formed entity creates exposure and direct liability for your msig signers, and I don’t think the signers (@Mag, @Allnodes, GAME, @Vadim_Everstake, Dokia, and @StakeandRelax) signed up for that. At this stage of decentralized governance and funding – we all should know not to do this.