After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to vote “Renew with 5 domains (adding Orbit Domain)” on this proposal at the Snapshot Vote.
Rationale
Having participated in Seasons 1 and 2, our opinion may be biased, but we agree with other delegates that this is one of the DAO’s most successful programs.
That said, there are a few suggestions we would like to make:
- We agree with what some delegates have expressed: a compensation model incorporating a bonus based on work performed should be explored. From our perspective, some Domains receive a higher volume of applications than others, making them more labor-intensive. Therefore, we see no issue with implementing an equitable base compensation for all Domains, complemented by a bonus tied to the marginal workload that a specific Domain entails compared to others.
- Not only do we support the inclusion of the Orbit Domain, but we also believe there should be flexibility to expand the budget in the future. We understand that this wouldn’t pose a problem due to the modularity proposed by @JoJo.
Regarding @Krst’s query: at least in the “Education, Community Growth and Events” Domain, the review and follow-up of all work associated with the Domain takes approximately 5 hours per day. Over 5 days (Monday to Friday), this equates to a total of 25 hours per week.
However, there have been instances where we’ve had to add a couple of hours on weekends for revisions due to a heavy proposal load. For example, proposals requesting more than $25K require a sharper review and, at times, calls with proposers who could only schedule meetings on weekends.
Considering the above, we estimate the total average time commitment to be around 30 hours per week or approximately 120 hours per month. This translates to a rate of $66.67 per hour.
We hope you find this information helpful.
In our case, we have published monthly reports for the Domain in our Reports Thread, detailing each approved project, its geographic distribution, and the remaining funding.
Regarding due diligence, we would like to mention that we have identified and rejected at least 9 scam applicants, all cases involving individuals attempting to impersonate someone else. No applicant advances past the initial review stage without verifying their identity. To ensure this, we not only check their social media profiles but also hold meetings with cameras turned on. We agree that these practices should be replicated in all domains and from our perspective Jojo is very well positioned to ensure this.