Thank you so much for the support
Absolutely, I will submit an iteration of the proposal this week to include updated compensation, domains, allocators, and the detailed processes/roles of the allocators. I will keep you posted on this thread @0x7751 thanks for the support
Thank you so much @jared for the support and feedback. I totally agree that we should be working towards a lightweight voting mechanism that involves the entire community to participate. The concept of delegated allocation to ensure builders from the community participate to give out the right grants, is a step intended to be in that direction. Hopefully, the learnings out of this 2 quarter experiment, should help us to drive towards it.
Regarding the domains, I will submit an iteration of the proposal this week to include updated compensation, domains, allocators, and the detailed processes/roles of the allocators. Before this, I am figuring out a way with Adam to have a detailed discussion around the potential domains with the community. Yet to finalize if it would be an exclusive grants call or if it would be on the community developer call itself. I’ll keep you posted. Thank you once again for taking time to go through the proposal
We are going to have an exclusive call on CGP 2.0 on 15th July, 9:30 AM PT on the grants voice channel!! Link to the event: Compound
In reference to the earlier proposal submitted here: CGP 2.0 - Delegated Domain Allocation by Questbook - #4 by massnomis
We will be discussing the following:
- Potential Domains
- Potential Allocators
- Updated compensation
Most importantly, we will be brainstorming inputs from Community on the new grants process! I kindly request everyone to review the proposal on the forum before joining the call. Looking forward!
I like it a lot.
My only request will be to incorporate and allocate someone from the Compound Labs team as a project guide. Project guide can spend between 30 mins - 1 hr with each of their projects every other week.
This will help in making sure the grantees can deliver stuff that is more relevant
That is a really good suggestion Robin. Based on your suggestion, I have added more specifics to the role of a compound lab member in the iteration of the proposal. The role, will not be restricted to ensuring the alignment of a grant project with the core vision. But also, provides relevant guidance on a need basis. Arranges AMA calls, and sessions with the applicants on a bi-weekly basis to address the concerns. You will see these inputs in the next iteration of the proposal in a couple of days. Thank you once again @robinnagpal
As discussed on the grants call, I request everyone here in the community to please select the important domains which you would want to see as part of this grants program. This should help us finalize the 5 domains, and move towards finalizing the domain allocator accordingly.
- Security Analysis Tools, Security Bounties
- Risk parameter update research
- Developer tooling
- Multichain Strategy
- Open Oracle
- Coding bootcamp
- New protocol ideas and dapps
Another part of the proposal where the community had strong differing opinions was on team compensation. Proposed compensation of $100K per 2 quarters in the initial proposal, was pointed out as very low, by a lot of community members. Hence presenting the updated compensation options below. I request you to kindly vote on the option below as per your judgment.
Initial Proposal: $100K for 6 months (24 weeks).
Domain Allocator (DA) : 500 x 24 = 12000 [$10/hr , Max $500 per week]
Therefore 5 DAs = 5 x 12000 = 60000 ($60K)
Grant Manager (GM): 800 x 24 = 19200 ($19.2K) [$15/hr, Max $800 per week]
Compound Labs Member (CL): CL: 500 x 24 = 12000 ($12K) [$10/hr, Max $500 per week]
- $100K for 6 months (24 weeks) - Intial proposed Amount
- $150K for 6 months (24 weeks): 1.5 x (Intially proposed Amount)
- $200K for 6 months (24 weeks): 2 x (Intially proposed Amount)
- $250K for 6 months (24 weeks): 2.5 x (Intially proposed Amount)
The amounts proposed seem rather low based on the research I have done for similar programs.
I would recommend a model that compensates more in line with the rates from other programs. I can provide examples of these rates but, at a high level, this is in line with what other programs like Aave/Uniswap pay (some of these programs also offer a flat rate for certain roles and hourly for others)
Domain Allocator (DA) : $75/hr
Grant Manager (GM): $125/hr
Compound Labs Member (CL): $100hr
One callout - I am not sure how the hours estimates that are provided here compare to other programs so there may be some differences that way in what is proposed here versus the programs I am comparing to.
Hope this helps!
Hey, this is much better than the previous. Much better compensation for those putting in the hours!
Lead: $150 an hour with a 30 hour/week cap
Review committee: $150 an hour with a 10 hour/week cap
Designer: one-off based on specific design engagements
Operations lead: $3.5k/month
Community manager: $6k/month
These are the compensation rates for Aave team.
comparatively, the newly proposed compensation is pretty good. great job @harsha
Hi Harsha. The Compound Labs team discussed our participation in the grants program internally. Each and every one of us is excited and supportive of a reignition of the program!
I think this is exactly what the ecosystem needs in the long term. Seeing the community decide that this is a priority in a grass-roots manner is awesome. We are flattered that you envision that members of our team are a good fit for the domain allocator roles.
When we created the system for community ownership back in 2020, we thought about decentralization and resilience. We asked ourselves: how do we make it so that if the Compound Labs team disappeared tomorrow, the protocol could still operate and be upgraded in perpetuity? We decided to take a step back and enable the community to take charge.
With this in mind, we have decided that members of Compound Labs can individually participate, so long as they are a minority of the allocators, and that participation is done on a voluntarily / pro bono basis.
That being said, I will respectfully pass on the proposed role of domain allocator. I am happy to provide feedback and guidance when needed with regards to the grants program.
I think for a test these proposed amounts make a lot of sense. We want highly motivated individuals to apply - not those looking for purely salaries. Of course compensation can be raised later on.
It’s way harder to lower comp than raise it.
Thank you so much for this note @adam and your kind words. Excited to know the support from the Compound Labs team! I have taken these policies into consideration to come up with the iteration of the proposal and structuring. Will be sharing the final draft once the domain allocators are finalized. Thank you!
Absolutely, that’s where the current efforts are going into. Finding the right domain allocators. Please do suggest a few names with whom we should speak to. That’d be really helpful!
I would make an open form that community members can share, that also includes a referral section. This is what I have seen work in previous similar instances.
Hi everyone! We are currently hunting for domain allocators for this program. If you think you would be the right person for any of the domains, please fill up the form, and we’ll connect with you. Feel free to refer someone from the community too, if you think they might be a good fit. Thank you for the support!
Link to fill up the form: https://forms.gle/W9986NiMfp96VeGj9
Hi @harsha, thanks for your initiative.
I’m not sure if the window for the applications for the current cycle is still open, however, a couple of questions that might be relevant for future cycles too:
1/ Domain Allocator weekly effort estimate and time commitments:
- What is the basis for the estimate of 15 hours / week? Is it based on the expected volume of grant applications? Is it capped to 15 hours / week?
- What happens if the volume of applications is much higher than expected, and the Domain Allocator can’t commit more hours?
- Does the grant team collaborate entirely online, or will there be routine meetings when team members are expected to participate live? This will be a big hurdle for people with other commitments.
2/ Scope of the “Risk Parameters update research” Domain:
The name of the Domain sounds a bit narrow if it’s limited to researching the Risk Parameters. Also, Gauntlet is already deeply involved in that arena, so I’m not sure there’s much to be gained by limiting to Risk Parameters. There would be more value if this domain includes market risk management too. For example, products based on volatility recommend actions after big price movements. However, many quant firms are known to predict volatility upfront (using Machine Learning and technical / trend analysis) and take proactive actions before a volatility spike. Such a product can potentially help Compound carryout on-chain risk mitigation (without a governance vote for parameter changes in a limited range), or put out notifications alerting the community of liquidation risk levels (without necessarily adjusting risk parameters).
So, is the scope of this domain fixed (to Risk Parameters research), or is it more flexible? Expanding the scope would be a lot more interesting and valuable. I would like to know community’s thoughts too on this.
Hey - I’m @harsha 's cofounder at Questbook. Wanted to give an update - below is a blurb from Harsha :
I have undergone surgery last week, and am away from the desk for a couple of weeks.
We are almost done with the interviews for the Domain Allocators. 2 more to go. We will be going for the voting on this as a proposal next week. The proposal will be open for voting for a week. Sorry about the delay here.