Milestone payout insurance - further discussion before next gov meeting
![KI](/rails/active_storage/representations/redirect/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsibWVzc2FnZSI6IkJBaHBBNXhHREE9PSIsImV4cCI6bnVsbCwicHVyIjoiYmxvYl9pZCJ9fQ==--1277faf9ca1ca7735e1261456455df2827ccd39b/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsibWVzc2FnZSI6IkJBaDdDRG9MWm05eWJXRjBTU0lKYW5CbFp3WTZCa1ZVT2hSeVpYTnBlbVZmZEc5ZmJHbHRhWFJiQjJrQmdHa0JnRG9LYzJGMlpYSjdCem9NY1hWaGJHbDBlV2xWT2dwemRISnBjRlE9IiwiZXhwIjpudWxsLCJwdXIiOiJ2YXJpYXRpb24ifX0=--e579049eb7f20fc1070cc24f3215f2949d184302/249008085123_c26baefa8aa6bf25a370_72.jpg%3F1517203729)
During the governance meeting we discussed a 'merge' of two related proposals on paying out people in time.
A decision was tabled as we need more input. Below you can find the 2 proposals (plz also review comments) plus the notes from our governance meeting. Please take the time to read this through and feel free to comment below, so we can come to a decision during next week's meeting.
- Proposal I: https://www.loomio.org/p/1qYNL7je/milestone-payout-insurance
Proposal II: https://www.loomio.org/p/xBq9rTuG/committing-to-accurate-payments-on-time
Meeting notes from sandcat:
RJ - Likes Satya’s proposal but this isn’t a quick answer. For the time being we need to just do payouts on time. This should extend to everything with a Fiat budget. MultiSends are a lot of work, monthly makes sense. Having an incentive layer will ease this tension. Use a stable coin.
Edu - No reaction; is distracted
Yalor - I like the idea of the payouts being closer AFAIK. Agrees the insurance policy will take longer.
Emex - Likes vojtechs because it’s easier to implement. Might have to abandon the MultiSend unless we can fix it.
Q: Use a stable coin, multisend with monthly payouts sounds good. Smart contract insurence is novel but likely too technical.
Kris - Bi-weekly or monthly would be great. We should hire somebody just for finance or budgeting. Not okay with using a stable coin. Would prefer to get paid in Ether. Doesn’t like the monthly rate, having the rate at the moment the milestone goes out protects people from volatility. Would prefer not to change the DApp. Agree with the idea of making an additional bonus milestone if we’re not getting paid in time.
Kay - Good feedback so far. The most imporant thing is to get payouts out quickly. Make a milestone, get paid out quickly. As long as we have this manual process it’s hard. Averaging out volatility is good for regular rewards.
Griff - Budget started on the 15th of Dec, he always offered to front any ether to anyone, this was the first proposal to fix the issue. We’ve been delayed due to feature creep since the DApp sucks and we have to deal with that. The issue is due to ether crashing and milestones not coming as fast as they need to. This wouldn’t be an issue if we didn’t move to Rinkeby. The actual price right now is cheap, I would think satya would want to make these milestones. There is a centralization issue on the multisend. Need to get more people to learn how to do the multi-send. There is a risk in V’s idea, if we have a dip on the one day we pay out, we get fucked, as Kris mentioned.
Lindsay - Handing it off
BowenSanders - Agrees with Kris and Griff
Amend and Clarify (Satya)
Most people seemed to be in favor of Vojtech’s solution. Not sure what to say. A stable coin is too ambitious(?). Let’s try to implement Vojtech’s solution as soon as possible but there may be an issue with sample size, we don’t want milestones on milestones. Let’s do another Loomio and do another discussion.
![S](/rails/active_storage/representations/redirect/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsibWVzc2FnZSI6IkJBaHBBM0FBRWc9PSIsImV4cCI6bnVsbCwicHVyIjoiYmxvYl9pZCJ9fQ==--b4baaa50d98a49ef835fd6476d141ffe6db8d62d/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsibWVzc2FnZSI6IkJBaDdDRG9MWm05eWJXRjBTU0lJYW5CbkJqb0dSVlE2RkhKbGMybDZaVjkwYjE5c2FXMXBkRnNIYVFHQWFRR0FPZ3B6WVhabGNuc0hPZ3h4ZFdGc2FYUjVhVlU2Q25OMGNtbHdWQT09IiwiZXhwIjpudWxsLCJwdXIiOiJ2YXJpYXRpb24ifX0=--bee53b50eefebbfaf3427852775dd64daaceca76/photo.jpg)
Satya Thu 10 May 2018 6:54AM
That's already been added during the Barca meetup. But I see that it is broken in the dapp
Yalor Tackson Thu 10 May 2018 2:42PM
Maybe we can fix ;)
![GG](/rails/active_storage/representations/redirect/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsibWVzc2FnZSI6IkJBaHBBMVpHREE9PSIsImV4cCI6bnVsbCwicHVyIjoiYmxvYl9pZCJ9fQ==--0bcd8fb0764f318ea61e77edf177a8e7086f97cf/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsibWVzc2FnZSI6IkJBaDdDRG9MWm05eWJXRjBTU0lKYW5CbFp3WTZCa1ZVT2hSeVpYTnBlbVZmZEc5ZmJHbHRhWFJiQjJrQmdHa0JnRG9LYzJGMlpYSjdCem9NY1hWaGJHbDBlV2xWT2dwemRISnBjRlE9IiwiZXhwIjpudWxsLCJwdXIiOiJ2YXJpYXRpb24ifX0=--e579049eb7f20fc1070cc24f3215f2949d184302/127269153316_6d4a4f90c5771dc530bd_72.jpg%3F1516693118)
Griff Green Wed 9 May 2018 10:59PM
YES PLEASE!
Yalor Tackson · Tue 8 May 2018 3:27PM
Why don't we just started requesting payments in ETH then and stop use a Fiat calculator ?
If someone on the DApp Team could add ETH to ETH functionality then we could say "I request 2.5 ETH for the work of _______ week" If one ETH is one ETH in Giveth then why can't we just scrap the whole conversion speculation situation for Giveth internal payments ?