Keenan Luke Various Reimbursements [Draft]

[KeenanL]

Hey all!

I’ve prepared this thread on DAOtalk to go over various payments where reimbursement will be requested to the 0xKLOM.eth wallet. I wanted to create this thread before a proposal is made to give ample time to discover whether the additional requests are justified in the DAO’s eye (as discussed with a handful of contributors in Lisbon).

Lisbon Travel

A proposal passed on-chain signaling support for a Lisbon travel stipend. I wanted to make some further requests, which some are already aware of. In the event of any disagreement/pushback, I will remove the Covid tests and reduce the plane tickets to the max amount specified. I will be extending this to Ally as well, as she is in an identical situation to my own and having a separate thread would likely be redundant. AllyQ will make her own proposal after any discussion in this thread:

Keenan Luke

$50 / daily (up to $800 max)

• Requesting $700 for 14 days of travel.

$300 (from Europe) or $600 (everywhere else)

• Requesting $775, which was the cheapest I was able to get the tickets at through several months of hunting.

LISCON ticket cost

• Requesting $200 for one early bird ticket.

Additional

• Requesting $300 for both mandatory PCR-PT tests. $200 in Canada, $100 in Lisbon. Happy to provide receipts on request.

AllyQ

$50 / daily (up to $800 max)

• Requesting $350 for 7 days of travel.

$300 (from Europe) or $600 (everywhere else)

• Requesting $775, which was the cheapest I was able to get the tickets at through several months of hunting.

LISCON ticket cost

• Requesting $0, as AllyQ did not attend Liscon.

Additional

• Requesting $300 for both mandatory PCR-PT tests. $200 in Canada, $100 in Lisbon. Happy to provide receipts on request.

ARBI’s Deployment Costs

Before we added ARBIs to the SWPRquickwallet scheme, I handled the multi-reward deployment of these pools. I am requesting this separate from any governance related refunds, since these would not be tracked in the same way. In the event that Arbitrum governance will not be refunded throughout the SWPR campaign launch period, I will submit a separate reimbursement proposal at a later date.

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000502

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.0007144

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000718

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.0026399

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000509

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000718

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000716

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.00057

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.0008326

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000834

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.003068

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000593

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000818

Arbitrum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Arbiscan 0.000816

Total ETH: 0.0140489

ENS

I registered the DXvoice.eth domain some time ago and wanted to hand ownership to DXdao as discussed. Total costs:

Ethereum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Etherscan 0.00177

Ethereum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Etherscan 0.008395 + 0.00656

Total ETH: 0.016726

[Caden]

I’m in favor of additional mandatory travel costs being covered. I would be against upgrades like paying for a business class ticket, but I vote that flying economy like you and Ally did should be covered.

I also paid well over the travel stipend for my flights flying economy, but I only requested the amount of the travel stipend in my proposal, so of this passes I’ll request the difference.

[Tammy]

My initial reaction to this reimbursement request was that the stipends should remain in place mainly because I’m wondering how we are going to manage these conference costs beyond the initial stipends where people start attending 5+ conferences a year.

However, the DXretreat was a special circumstance outside of LisCon itself where travel should be covered.

Expensed Items:

• I get the request for the covered flight. My rental car (though I’m based in Lisbon) was more than the reimbursement would cover. So it would also benefit me to request the full amount for that cost.

• The PCR tests are another thing I’m wondering about – I had to do a couple. Happy to get those reimbursed as well. I think the cost was like 25€ though. Should we set a limit on this or just everyone state what cost them money at LisCon and we’ll cover it? Also, now I’m wondering about the PCR tests at ETHCC for those who flew in and had to get them done to enter the conference and events. Should we reimburse those as well?

Creating an Annual Conference Budget

In the future, I think we should only cover for expenses relating to a certain number of conferences per year + retreat. Perhaps 2-3 conferences per contributor tops, unless they are speaking at the conference.

Basically, there needs to be a better budget for these things going forward so we aren’t accidentally spending too much money on these conferences.

[fluidDrop]

I agree with Tammy - the whole point of having a stipend is to avoid having to expense exact amounts, having to go through invoices and the traditional expenses processes in a traditional company.

The stipend should roughly represent the median cost of all contributors - some will pay less, some will pay more. Those who pay less don’t refund the amount to the DAO and therefore those who pay more shouldn’t get extra funding from the DAO.

Ideally, issues around the travel stipend would have been raised in the DXLisbon Contributor Stipend Forum Post. Where one could have raised the fact that the stipends were too low.

However, having said all of this I believe the DAO should cover flight costs for DXRetreats. Thus, given that these flights were also booked to attend the DXRetreat, I would vote favourably on an eventual proposal.

[AugustoL]

My flight from argentina cost 1778 USD, if a proposal pass paying travel reimbursements over the agreed amount in the past it wont bee a good governance action, the dao and their members should take responsibility over the decisions it made in the past with no special considerations to anyone.

If @KeenanL and @allyq end up receiving more than the costs that we agreed in DXLisbon Contributor Stipend and Funds - #3 by Melanie, I want that too, and mine is three times what we agree on.

The stipend does not include the PCR test cost that you put over the “Additional” section, that is very subjective.

This being said I think this is bad, we had the whole DXLisbon Contributor Funds discussion DXLisbon Contributor Stipend and Funds - #3 by Melanie to came up with rules to make this simple, and your reimbursement request does not follow what the dao agreed on.

Nevertheless It would be good for me if we cover all that stuff because I will request for my full flight reimbursement if you are payed for yours, and covid test as additional, which means less money spent for me but it wont be a good governance decision IMO.

[AugustoL]

just saw this comment from @Melanie DXLisbon Contributor Stipend and Funds - #6 by Melanie, I guess once this passes you will be able to make your request, I would vote positive on it as long as what si requested is within the costs agreed upon.

[KeenanL]

Thanks for the comments, all.

Definitely in agreeance and didn’t mean to put myself in an “exception” position. The thought process was that testing in particular is a mandatory travel expense, one that hadn’t even occurred to me at the time of discussion. (Note, to me the daily stipend covers day-to-day testing between events, while international travel reqs are a bit of a different ballgame).

Instead of putting through this proposal I brought the concern to Contributor UX who had conveyed similar comments from others outside Europe. Utilizing the feedback, @Melanie created a proposed amendment to the stipend that:

1). Slightly increases the air travel amounts for outside Europe;
2). Introduces a small coverage for anyone with mandatory testing requirements.

To be clear, I am happy with the stipend in its current state, and simply wanted to bring the above to a discussion. Personally I don’t care about the differences between the flights, the mandatory testing is a larger concern that slipped my mind at the time of the original proposal (It was a topic which had received support when discussing in person). If this proposal/the amendment were not to pass, there would be absolutely no issue with staying consistent to the stipend proposal.