[Proposal] BizDev and Product focused request for value & REP

Hi all,
This is my first proposal I will be doing. I have tried to lay out as much information and references as possible and there are not a ton of comparisons.

Please feel free to provide kind feedback.

Over the past 5 weeks, I have ramped up my participation in DXdao, and this is my first proposal.

In addition to regular participation, I am listing some of the hard tasks I have performed:


  1. Testing of Omen and providing feedback [2hr] COMPLETE

  2. Created and refined (with community feedback) the gathering of Omen Market ideas [5hr] COMPLETE

  1. Created a Voting mechanism to vote on these Markets and rank them across Keybase and Telegram communities [4hr] COMPLETE

Final outcome:

  1. Created, wrote and refined (with community feedback) Omen FAQs to be linked from Omen.eth [7hrs] COMPLETE
  1. Created the “Omen - How to Use” doc, which is a tutorial for new users. [3hrs] COMPLETE


  1. Worked with Gnosis representative to incorporate best practices into our Omen offering and launch [2hr] COMPLETE

  2. Dug in deeper with JK and the dev team to discover how the AMM mathematics and changes of the Omen markets are displayed, to make sure this is correct. [1hr] COMPLETE

  3. Created, wrote and refined (with community feedback) the doc for these programs: Omen - Incentives for First Month [5hrs] ONGOING

9) Alongside @bendicion, leading the DXdao’s participation in the Panvala program. Surveying, awareness, meetings, discussions [4hrs] ONGOING

Also, staking 50k PAN to help with this initiative to grow awareness of DXdao.

10) Testing of Mesa [1hr] COMPLETE


Discovered an issue with Liquidity Orders when performing with a Gnosis Smart Contract Wallet. Discussed with Gnosis. Has to do with gas when too many orders are being placed.

  1. Made famous the crazy bug that @mrtixil initially discovered but went unacknowledged in Mesa, after testing, testing, testing. [1hr] COMPLETE


I have also become an active member of the BizDev team contributing on a regular basis, such as weekly calls, discussions, outreach, feedback, solutions. [5-10hrs]

Because I know it’s helpful, I’ve aimed to list the time I have spent focused solely on the above tasks over the past 5 weeks. Total of ~36-41 hours (in actuality it’s likely much more than that).

Proposal Request:

USD equivalent
For Reference sheet:

Intermediate, Commitment Level 1, rate 2666 USD/month (160 hours) $16.66/hr rate
36 hours
Request for ETH equivalent of $599.85

Open to DXD in place of ETH.

For Reference:


  1. Recent contributor for 5 hours of feedback contribution: ~ 2000 REP (1500 REP for the work + 500 REP for the initiative) ~0.15%REP

  2. http://alchemy.daostack.io/dao/0x519b70055af55a007110b4ff99b0ea33071c720a/proposal/0xd472fe31261688406eaaa7b6ebddda90a8a9b9a4f4426c3a18041884f0cafd67 (0.24% REP)

  3. Gitcoin grant donation 0.3% REP (Understanding the REP doesn’t equate to any work done - but it signals the importance of getting more REP holders, but really interested REP holders)

This is my first proposal request and significantly higher contribution (multiples) in comparison:
Request is for 1% REP

Note: Existing REP
I have small amount of REP (~473) from the Initial REP distribution

Request for ETH equivalent of $599.85 and 1% REP


Hey Sky,
I love the work you’re doing, and I liked your compensation proposal.
I have two point that I would be happy to see a discussion around

  • 1% REP is a pretty big ask although I definitely think it is reasonable at his point in time. I think those kind of amounts should be reserved to very committed members. As you gain more REP, I think the amount of work you’d need to put in to get another 1% would be higher. (In the worker compensation guidelines the amounts are lower)
  • This point is more of a general discussion. I wonder if we should request work proposals to be approved off chain before the work is done? In what cases it is more suitable to accept a work proposal after the fact?

Thanks for this feedback.

Your first point makes a lot of sense.
It was partly determined relative to the reference comparisons, but also includes an initial first time booster as some other cases have included (almost to “become part of the DAO”). I understand that REP becomes harder to earn the more REP you have. This calculation is not laid out anywhere, but is more implied (Clearly increasing difficulty more and more as you move towards the 4% max level.)

As for your second point that is a good topic. It is certainly easier to get work pre-approved for dev project work. I think it is harder to do for this other type of work. There would have been no way to lay out these tasks and contributions at the beginning of the five weeks.
I think in general, it is always a better practice to show commitment, put work in, and show outputs first, and then ask for REP/payment based on this. It puts all the risk in the worker’s hands and protects the DAO. Maybe devs would not work this way, even though it would be good for the DAO.
The risk is someone puts in a ton of work and then if the DAO decides not to value that the same way. The worker always has the option to do less or move on.



I’m really grateful that you took initiative on these things. We really had a gap for leadership on Omen until you filled it. So I want you to be compensated in a way that makes you happy.

With that said, 1% does seem high compared to other issuances of REP. I also think the amount of ETH asked for is too low.

IMO, I’d raise the ETH at least 50%, and lower the REP by at least 50%. You outdid the “Intermediate” level of performance during this period.


Thanks for additional feedback.
Based on the noted comparisons and @cmagan 's verification, it doesn’t seem like 1% REP is unreasonable.
Including @ingalandia 's suggesting that ETH should be higher, say $900-1000 of ETH, I would prefer to give up the ETH in return for a larger voice in the DAO, so I will only ask for the 1% REP for this proposal.


Some math:

Given that the DXdao is in control of a million dollar treasury, and >1% of DMM token supply which is 2,500,000 tokens valued at $1.30 each, that’s $4,250,000.00 under management by the DXdao. 1% of that is $42,500 and that is being asked for 1 month’s work. The valuation of DXdao’s treasury went up 3x this month, so asking for 1% now is a lot different than asking for 1% a month ago.

This is too high. We can’t have everyone working for REP only.

That is why I recommend something in the .5%-.75% range, and increasing the ETH.

Thanks @ingalandia - feedback is useful.

This is my thinking:
I think it is dangerous and misleading to assign a USD value to REP. I know a few people are doing this. I am clearly not asking for $42,500! nor am I asking for half that. That would be crazy. First, REP can’t be bought and sold, and also the fact that the ETH that the DAO holds is planning to be spent building products which are supposed to support DXD. It’s one of the key reasons to split up financial and governance, and kind of the whole reason for the DAO.
I am asking for a larger voting voice in the DAO, in place of financial.

To help put this in perspective, the DAO currently has 9 people holding 50.7% of the REP and 20 people holding 72% of the REP.
We talk a lot about how DXdao is so much more decentralized than things like Compound. This seems like kind of a dream at this point. The goal should be to have 1000 people each holding 1% REP.

I also used actual DAO past proposal comparisons to base things off of because there isn’t much else to reference.

As for asking for REP now versus one month ago, one key difference is that I am asking for REP after doing now 5 weeks of work, so it is now 5 weeks later for work done over that month. Versus asking for REP 5 weeks ago before doing the work.

Does the DAO really have a preference to pay out ETH over REP (which also gets inflated over time as REP gets minted) to good contributors to the DAO?

Additional thoughts about these topics are welcomed.

1 Like

First off Sky, great work. I hope you continue to be involved in DXdao and look forward to you being an active member in governance with the REP I hope you soon receive after things are sorted out here.

Second, the REP distribution needing to be better can’t be stressed enough. DXdao has many challenges to conquer, and this is chief amongst them.

You make several points which I would also like to touch on:

  • this is a fair point:
  • To the following, I would say it’s in fact the other way around. Due to the need to have more active REP holders, there is actually a preference to compensate in REP rather than ETH, granted the recipient is under the max:
  • I don’t think your references are well considered. They cherry pick a few cases of new comers earning their first REP from a little while ago and ignore the worker guidelines, or comparison to what some of the more engaged workers have earned. Also, the gitcoint grant REP program was put in place before the fundraiser . . things have changed and that should be obvious.

I wanted to address this part separately. I actually think it is dangerous to not consider the value of REP. REP holders have responsibility for the decision making over a $4M+ treasury, not to mention the products and direction of DXdao itself. Therefor it is critical that REP holders are properly incentivized. This hasn’t been addressed by DXdao yet, but I think will need to be soon.

1 Like

Thanks @JohnKelleher for more useful feedback.

Lots of great feedback from bunch of people and varying ideas across the spectrum
I am wondering still what type of ask makes sense for this contribution and involvement?

$0 + 0.10% REP
$0 + 0.25% REP
$0 + 0.5% REP
$0 + 0.75% REP

$600 + 0.10% REP
$600 + 0.25% REP
$600 + 0.5% REP
$600 + 0.75% REP

$900 + 0.10% REP
$900 + 0.25% REP
$900 + 0.5% REP
$900 + 0.75% REP

Looking for some guidance. Thanks

This is a good point. What is the value of REP? And then how is the USD value of REP taken into account for everything the DAO does? As you say, this hasn’t been addressed yet.

I feel like I should weigh in, because these issues we are in dialogue with over the conversation I think will form precedence in operating practices that we end up referencing back to in the future (like Supreme Court decisions maybe :sweat_smile:). I also want to weigh in because I am planning on making a proposal for REP at some point in the future, but I wanted to (1) wait longer enough so I have made valuable contributions and (2) lots of other members know who I am.

So, with that being said, I am super impressed with the level of detail in the non-regular participation tasks you have outlined. I’ve noticed how active you are in chats/discussions but then to see the hourly breakdown of some of your work puts it in a different perspective.

Even so, I agree with @cmagan that–in general–I would be more enthusiastic, about approving a work proposal onchain versus after the fact. The caveat to this is that that methodology seems a bit traditional and since dxDAO is intentionally trying not to be a CORPORATION in the monolithic sense I do think that there are cases where work done independently by anyone who wants to contribute in some way should be welcome and compensated for. Maybe there could be a budget amount earmarked every quarter for individuals doing work independently and then have it open for them to claim compensation via proposals.

I also agree that 1% REP is pretty big ask, and if that was awarded first time then there would need to be greater amount of work done before getting another 1%

Even though there is a lot of discussion trying to quantify compensation, in terms of USD value of REP, or if more REP or more ETH from treasury should be requested, the above is my initial gut reaction. If we were to seriously try to find a way to compensate based on some applied framework I have read interesting things about EVA which is basically a model of financial performance based on the residual wealth calculated by deducting its cost of capital from its operating profit, but it would need to be researched further and adapted to a DAO framework.

But back to @sky 's specific proposal I am inclined to agree with @JohnKelleher on the point that REP right now is a preferred way to compensate over ETH. One point that I don’t think was made totally explicit: Even though 1% REP seems like a lot, As long as we keep awarding REP each individual’s holdings become diluted (I have seen my REP % dilute over last 2-months). So, 1% now, awarded to an individual that does no other work and makes no contribution, in an environment where we are purposefully trying to get more active members and be more distributed in terms of governance, will not be 1% REP a year from now.

Looking at the spectrum of options you posted, take it with a grain of salt, but I would make the first request REP only, so like .5% REP, then make an additional request for ETH payment of work you plan to do next quarter. I realize that non-development work is a lot of times harder to quantify and show clear deliverables for, but I still think you would get a proposal passed for this even if it was planned work for the future.


After creating and hearing lots of good conversations around this topic, I am going to redo this proposal.

This is for the listed plus additional contributions. The work was not proposed prior because that would be impossible. In my opinion, when a contributor adds value and only asks for compensation afterwards, he or she should not be penalized. It puts all the risk in the worker’s hands and protects the DAO.

Redo of proposal to $600 (in ETH) and 0.55% REP.


I completely agree on that. In particular having a proposal voted takes at least a week (in practice maybe 2) and we don’t want to always be at least a week late compare to an organization where one person can approve some work to be done within the hour.
Moreover it’s easier to estimate the value of one’s work after the fact than before.
So for the dxDAO, that’s more speed, less risk and better info.
I would in general be more incline to pay more for work done than for work to do, as this removes execution risk to the DAO.


I agree with this statement. REP doesn’t cost anything right now.