Thank you for your ideas [and the ApeCoin DAO community for the insightful discussions]. A moderator will reach out to the author to finalize the AIP Draft using the appropriate template. In accordance with DAO-approved guidelines, if the author doesn’t respond within 30 days, the proposal will be automatically transferred to the Withdrawn category, and the author can re-submit the idea. Once the AIP is Drafted and meets all DAO-approved guidelines, it will be published on Snapshot for the official live voting phase at: Snapshot.
Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments. @BoredApeG please see your messages for the next steps.
Thank you for submitting this AIP. As per our chat yesterday (which I enjoyed!) I’ll also echo my thoughts here:
This should be the primary focus: Working towards a method of attracting top talent by means other than a popularity contest (and I say this with no intention to offend anybody who currently sits on the council), taking into consideration demonstrated experience, qualifications, and who’s motivation comes from their desire to improve the DAO, over their salary.
If the salary dropped, and the demand to be an SC member also dropped, then it would be a clear indicator that their primary motive for getting involved was financial, and they shouldn’t be there initially.
I appreciate the opportunity but don’t think giving possible payment options is sufficient. I would prefer a discussion to a poll, and I don’t think any of those options work. To go by means of selecting out of pre-defined options, as a member of the community, I’d feel isolated and limited in my input.
If we’re going down the payment options route, then I’d suggest amending the AIP proposal to include Option 5: None of the above (re-think the whole thing)
I think it should all be done in $APE. Furthermore I don’t believe the amount of $APE given should vary depending on its value at the given time. If it’s about the money, do the whole thing in USDC and leave $APE out of it. If it’s $APE, then it’s $APE and whatever $APE is worth at the time.
I’m conscious my notes here emphasised the suggestion that were it not for the generous salary, the desire to be on SC would drop, but I don’t think it should be overlooked because I don’t think that’s the type of person we need in the SC. This is why I believe that as well as tackling this payment structure, we should focus (if not more) on attracting talent and scrutinising the application process.
I don’t have the solution, but respectfully, I also don’t believe it’s any of the options suggested in this AIP.
I believe that the payment structure should be target/task/milestone-based.
If we all vote for a milestone that the council has to achieve, then it will be a fair game for all. The council will push the members, the members will actively participate. Win-win for all.
This proposal is live for Snapshot vote at Snapshot. The voting period closes next Wednesday at 9PM EST.
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.