The current monthly Special Council compensation is 20,833$ paid in Apecoin. As a comparison the salary of the President of France is 25% less and there is no country in the world with with an average monthly income as high. Monaco, ranking #1 in average income per month is 15,507$.
Yes but High Salary attract high profiles?
Yes and no, the Apecoin Council is not a job. Candidates are not going through an interview and there is no requirements in term of background and competences. And most of all there is no requirement in term of activity, candidates are not requested to make the Special Council their main and only occupation. The minimum weekly working time expected is only
In this situation the opposite can happen, the high retribution can bring attention from people only motivated by money. Especially considering there is no accountability or task tracking of what’s performed by the Special Council members.
Dividing by 5
Currently, a Special council member receive 20833$/month. By reducing the amount by 5 to 4,166.6$, the current budget for 1 member would cover all 5 members of the Special Council.
The monthly 83,332$ saved could re-injected in the DAO’s budget to fund AIP or allocated to a special Marketing fund for exemple.
Let’s discuss the topic!
Proposals submitted to the AIP Ideas category can be vague, incomplete ideas. Topics submitted here are not required to be submitted as a formal AIP Draft Template, however, you may still use the template if you wish.
A bit too late now. Should have brought up this subject matter 6 months ago. Anyhow, you are right, there was no interviews or competence check whatsoever. IMO, $60000 per month for 3 SC is not much compared to Cartan $300k though. Ken
Just a quick note or two:
- Not sure it’s too late to have this discussion as a community - @CypherGlaze brings up a valid point, especially as we think about the future of the DAO
- Special Council does not take the place of Cartan Group, so comparing costs is like comparing apples to oranges - and has no value
The interim WG0 will be charged with managing the RFP process to identify the appropriate organization (maybe groups/orgs/DAOs) to replace The Cartan Group. Perhaps at that point, we could be discussing admin costs as we go to vote.
Appreciate your engagement in the community Ken, I’m just adding this to the thread for those new to the forums.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to compare apples and oranges. I just looked at it from the expenses and budget spending stand point. It is hard to fully understand how a DAO entity manages its income streams as well expenses compared to a regular Corporations - either public or private. Maybe the DAO entity management structure is still pretty much premature and undefined with lots know unknowns. Also, that’s my main reason to apply for a position and work for the ApeCoin DAO.
I’ve given my rationale in another thread but I am against reducing compensation at this stage in the DAO for SC members.
We should revisit this topic on a regular basis.
For me I would like to see how things change with our new council members. A new community majority could radically shift our perception of what work they are doing and how it can benefit the foundation.
I think it will take a few cycles of council members to land on appropriate expectations, but my perception is we certainly moved in the right direction with this last group. I know @badteeth has his WG0 proposal and mission statement proposals that would help us be more aligned and have clearer expectations for how the council members supported that vision.
Yes we should be aware of what we are paying them, but I would be against reducing at this point when it feels as we are moving in the right direction.
(Random thought but can we get a tone button on posts that allows a reader to have an idea of what intention the post was written in?)
I actually asked about the rationale behind $20k SC monthly salary during the discussion period on the Elections and Nominations AIPs but my question was ignored by the AIP authors
I agree with your assessment in terms of this position not having any specific accountability checks and balances or any professional or workload requirements! The nomination criteria was virtually non existent (just holding one $ape, signing up to discourse at any time, and passing the general KYC). The selection process was then left 100% to the community of voters with large holders disproportionately affecting the results as we saw it happen live! We were lucky to have 3 amazing members voted in but the process could have easily ended up recruiting random people backed by whales or large stake holders or someone with a very high level of popularity in the community but little to no experience of leading a DAO!
This is the system that we have now and I don’t think only reducing the salary of SC will fix it. If there were certain professional criteria in place plus an ask for full-time commitment to the “job” then I think $20k per month is not too much over the average pay for a position like this.
I’m not sure about arbitrarily cutting down the salary to 1/5 of what it is currently. Again, I think we need a wholistic approach to this issue and decide how to attract and retain the best talent for this leadership position from people with a successful track record of involvement in de-Gov (even if not necessarily in Apecoin DAO).
Thank you for raising the question! I think it’s important that we discuss this as a community and hopefully improve the process for the next election cycle.
Thank you Novo, yes indeed it’s important to talk about it as a community.
In regardes to the “retain and attract best talents” the current process is not tailored for that. Even if there are already amazing talents in Web3 gravitating in the BAYC/ApeCoin ecosystem we need a better approach to justify this cost and not attract also people for the wrong reason.
We could also use the services of a recruitement company specialized in such High Profiles. Most of them are already employed and not aware of what we do here.
Thank you for taking the time to reply. Bringing this 6 months ago was IMO not ideal and justified as we had literally 0 visibility on what the council was doing. I also discovered the 20k/month amount during the election, I initially thought it was 20k split between the 5 members
A very interesting question about how to attract talent. I built and sold a couple of head hunting companies and I wouldn’t want to go down the outsourced recruiter route unless we had exhausted all other options. Main reason being that someone from within the community imo is likely to do a much better job than someone outside.
Where would a headhunter go to find the ideal profile, which comparable DAOs would we poach from? My understanding is that leading a DAO like ApeCoin is a brand new role never existing before, so no one is going to have the specific experience.
In which case, a candidate who really knows the DAO’s nuts and bolts with strong leadership experience somewhere is likely to be the best profile.
Not to mention saving the ~25% fee!
I’m currently working on an AIP Establishing Accountability Practices that helps to understand what each SC member is doing on a weekly/monthly basis so we can understand if the $20k per month is justified or not. Because working 3h a week just by checking AIP’s and doing some board meetings in my opinion doesn’t justify the $20k a month. A discussion that’s worth opening, thanks Cypher.
Hello @CypherGlaze ,
Just a heads up, this topic will close automatically later on today as it has been seven days since it was created. Are you comfortable with the amount of community discussion to move this Idea to Draft Preparation? Or would you like to extend the community discussion for another seven-day period for more ideas to be hammered out prior to Draft Preparation?
Looking forward to hearing from you,
Thank you Mallard, I would like to move to draft preparation
The lack of definition on the role of the Special Council, which is actually the APE Foundation board of directors, going into the previous election cycle focused a lot of attention on the SC compensation.
Equating hours worked to pay deserved makes complete sense in employee roles, but this is never the consideration for board seats – directors are not employees of APE Foundation.
You compensate outside directors for the value they bring to the organization based on their experience, not the hours they work – although most boards have minimum participation and availability requirements.
As you go to draft on this @CypherGlaze I’d suggest pointing it to further define what the APE Foundation needs in a Board of Directors, as opposed narrowly focusing on compensation in order to best make sure the APE Foundation is getting value out of the compensation we pay the SC.
This article gives a decent overview of board roles and compensation:
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
Sure thing @CypherGlaze .
A moderator (myself) will get in touch with you directly to draft the AIP in the appropriate template. Once the AIP is drafted and meets all the DAO-approved guidelines, the proposal will be posted on Snapshot for live official voting at: Snapshot
Keep an eye out here for further updates regarding this process. Will message you directly @CypherGlaze