The Special Council is part of the Ape Foundation which itself is the DAO. If you scroll up top you will see images that show this heirarchy.
Nothing to do with employment law. It’s do with the fact that tying their salary to the performance of the token implies that their actions and activities are designed to affect the token price.
Investments and salaries are always taxed. The token, which is already classed as an investment, would still be an investment if the SC salary were paid (as they currently are) based on the performance of the token. The point that I was making there is that even though some are pretending that the token isn’t a security (and thus an investment) offering it as a vested performance based salary incentive just solidifies that it was in fact offered as an investment to the SC.
That’s a personal decision that each has to make. But my guess is that if $20K per month were paid out in 20K $APE, there would be different conversations around that very notion because at some point they’d end up with $5K per month instead of $20K. As it stands, $20K per month remains as-is regardless of the $APE price.
Instead of just USD equivalent, some or all of the payment should be in $APE. That way there is incentive for them to make the DAO more valuable and drive price up
I’ve asked @Lost.Admin to speed up the process as much as he can, hopefully we’ll be able to get to vote before then so that the community can vote on this matter.
So, with barely 4 voting cycles left in Oct, and with AIP-138 indicating that Nov-Dec is the cycle one time-line for voting, I am not sure that AIP-337 will be up for vote before the Nov election cycle.
Also @Moonlyght, I think we need an AIP that provides certainty as to the timeline for an AIP to go from drafts to admin review to vote. I will probably write up that one because right now there’s no transparency or timeline for when AIPs go through the process - and so, we just keep guessing as to when they actually leave admin review and go up for vote.
The AIP implementation is administered by the Ape Foundation. Implementation may be immaterially or materially altered to optimize for security, usability, to protect APE holders, and otherwise to effect the intent of the AIP. Any material deviations from an AIP, as initially approved, will be disclosed to the APE holder community.
I don’t know what the council does besides put up AIPs to vote. And the AIPs lately are mostly terrible. Can they show the $200k+ per month in value they bring?
The best thing is democracy, let’s participate and use the power to vote for each decision made by each member here, each one has a way of seeing the situation, with the vote we exercise our thinking.
Strongly disagree. There are dozens, if not hundreds of DAOs in the ether. One of the only ways to evaluate a DAO is how well it governs itself.
If the governance process or qualifications of elected officials are not up to par, how can you even begin to take the DAO seriously? As an investor or project looking to participate, I would just join a better managed DAO.
This directly effects the native currency of the DAO. If the DAO is just a joke plutocracy, then the value of a vote is $0 and so is the token.
It can be kind of hard to find that information. They don’t have any control over the quality of AIPs that go to vote. You can find what the Special Council does here:
The Special Council also put up an AIP that is still in the process that would offer the community different options to choose from to reduce their pay:
There was an earlier version of this AIP (AIP-277) that called for an immediate reduction in all present SC salaries, which was Returned for Reconstruction for reasons not unlike the ones you made mention of.
This one would apply to anyone appointed for the term beginning January 1, 2024… this upcoming election.
