I highly appreciate the team that worked on this. Many of the lessons we now know in hindsight, but I want to clearly address them here.
The root cause if this problem is there isn’t anything to onboard people to.
- job placement
- receiving a grant
- building infrastructure
- operations admin
I’m a bit confused about the desired output, outcome, and impact expected by the program. I don’t know that retroactive comp is the answer. The real answer may be that people need roles to onboard to - roles with compensation. And if these roles don’t exist, then we don’t need an onboarding function.
At GovHack, writing a proposal is a great forcing function to help newbies learn about the DAO, but it isn’t a great output to have newbies draft mediocre proposals which use up delegate time to then get denied and leave a sour flavor for the proposer.
Before thinking about a next version, think about the need for onboarding at all. What are we onboarding to? How does a program educating people about how DAOs work help us?
I’m scared this program will give people false hope for opportunities while also creating a situation where we have a lot of unpaid labor - both the leaders of this initiative and those who join the fellowship.
Is this role paid? (I personally hate that DAOs have a reputation for people having to do free work. Me doing a couple months of work to pass a proposal which pays me is me agreeing to the earnings, but the people who are onboarding have way less of a chance of getting there.
All said. Thank you for the effort and the lessons. I’d be happy to help brainstorm ways we can develop roles which could bring value to an onboarding effort continuing.