Guide Pay Review: September 2019

Timed Discussion

Discussion ended:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Secured
#1
We're overdue in reviewing and voting on Guide pay so I volunteered to facilitate this process. See this thread for the previous discussion and vote.
The pay period under review starts on 2019-09-07 (September 7th), not this month, as we are a month late on our review.

So far, the terms of Guide pay have remained unchanged since the beginning of M3. Those terms are:

- 600 FCT per month
- 3 month period

The purpose of this discussion is to define the terms we wish to vote on so that I can create a poll that represents the full spectrum of the standing party's views. We can leave things exactly the same or we can change one or both of the two terms (time between reviews and amount).
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
Secured
#2
This thread is a Major Timed Discussion and I am designed to help facilitate efficient communication.

Everyone may take part in this discussion and vote. Unless this discussion is ended early or extended, it will end in 8 days after which a vote may take place. After 18 hours from the start of the thread or any point up until 24 hours are left in the discussion, you can make a motion to end the discussion immediately or extend the discussion beyond it's initial time frame by selecting the pertinent button at the top of this thread. If someone "seconds" your motion, a poll will take place and if a majority of voters vote yes by the time the discussion is scheduled to end, the time period will be extended for 72 hours.
 

Chappie

Factomize Bot
Secured
#4
We are now 18 hours into the discussion. If you have taken part in the thread, you may now make a motion to extend this Major Discussion by 72 hours or end this conversation by selecting the pertinent button at the top of this thread. This option will end when there are 24 hours left in the discussion.
 
Secured
#6
The three-month period seems appropriate (provided we can stick to it!)

Guides perform a valuable and important role which takes a lot of time and effort and which should be rewarded.

I would particularly like to see those guides with extensive experience, knowledge of the protocol and deep understanding of our decentralized governance processes rewarded proportionately. Given the FCT price pressure which is currently limiting the grant pool this might not be the time to drive this forward. So we may need to stick for now with the status quo.
 
Secured
#9
I believe that $2K (gross) is too low for the task and also believe it shows in the amount of labour put in by the guides last 2 terms. But the same applies to ANOs and grants, where you see the same happening. It would not want to favor guides in terms of remuneration compared to ANOs. We all are suffering from the lower FCT price. I do hope to see an uptick in engagement from both guides and other parties when FCT is at a higher price again. Because to me this is one of the biggest worries last few months. Although guides have no executive power, they should be (soft) leaders in the community and I am not sure whether we currently are to be totally honest.
 
Secured
#11
Pay needs to be increased. It's roughly $2K USD a month. I appreciate the Guides taking one for the team (community) to date, but it's time for Guide pay to be raised to at least 1000 FCT/month, if not closer to 1500.
I honestly don't think the Guides are earning 1000 FCT/month, at least not all of them all of the time. Perhaps if we increase the pay the Guides will increase their efforts but I'd rather see it happen the other way around. That being said, I'll add 1000 FCT as an option to the poll so it's a voting option. Thanks for chiming in on the discussion!
 
Secured
#12
I'm okay with 600 still, or even an increase, but either way with a cavat:

Let's remember this discussion when (I hope very soon) 600 fct looks like we are just pouring money on the guides.

Getting paid in tokens and investing in the blockchain ecosystem like this needs to have its rewards! It isn't supposed to be a constant sacrifice, as we all know it has been.
 
Secured
#13
To help make this process go smoother in the future, I would recommend the following change.

Prior to this discussion opening that guides discuss among themselves what their pay should be. If a single amount can't be agreed then multiple amounts can be submitted for discussion. This conversation can be kept private and amounts each guide wanted don't have to be disclosed to ANOs.

Secondly, a discussion is opened up where the amount/s are revealed and ANOs can discuss whether they are happy or not with the amount. If not then additional amounts can be suggested and agreed up.

Finally, there is a vote on these amounts and a choice is made.

I suggest this because unless I first have some context into whether guides feel like they're being under or overpaid then I really don't have any way of sharing what I feel is a fair amount. I don't want to offend guides by saying they should stick to their current pay but also I don't want to offend ANOs by suggesting that they get more when of course right now we're all spending more than we earn.
 
Secured
#14
To help make this process go smoother in the future, I would recommend the following change.

Prior to this discussion opening that guides discuss among themselves what their pay should be. If a single amount can't be agreed then multiple amounts can be submitted for discussion. This conversation can be kept private and amounts each guide wanted don't have to be disclosed to ANOs.

Secondly, a discussion is opened up where the amount/s are revealed and ANOs can discuss whether they are happy or not with the amount. If not then additional amounts can be suggested and agreed up.

Finally, there is a vote on these amounts and a choice is made.

I suggest this because unless I first have some context into whether guides feel like they're being under or overpaid then I really don't have any way of sharing what I feel is a fair amount. I don't want to offend guides by saying they should stick to their current pay but also I don't want to offend ANOs by suggesting that they get more when of course right now we're all spending more than we earn.
I like this approach. Would you be interested in facilitating the next review session?
 
Secured
#15
Much that I like Keith's point above we will need to try to work out whether guides require to be paid a consistent $ amount or a consistent FCT amount. If it is a $ amount then, in my opinion Keith's points have a lot of value. However if it is a FCT amount then the guides are in the same boat as the ANOs and dependent on the market (which hopefully is a reflection of the sterling efforts applied by this community).
 
Secured
#16
Much that I like Keith's point above we will need to try to work out whether guides require to be paid a consistent $ amount or a consistent FCT amount. If it is a $ amount then, in my opinion Keith's points have a lot of value. However if it is a FCT amount then the guides are in the same boat as the ANOs and dependent on the market (which hopefully is a reflection of the sterling efforts applied by this community).
We've had this conversation previously and decided to pay in FCT. We can certainly revisit the conversation but it's definitely something that has been discussed previously. I'll see if I can find the thread.
 
Secured
#17
We've had this conversation previously and decided to pay in FCT. We can certainly revisit the conversation but it's definitely something that has been discussed previously. I'll see if I can find the thread.
All grants are paid in FCT and I do not want to make exceptions for Guides. As Sam mentioned we have had extensive discussions about this previously.

I'm personally fine with continuing at 600 FCT/month even if FCT is worth considerably less now than when it was first decided on more than a year ago. We are all in this boat together and a low price should effect everyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.