I really appreciate the time taken by @krst & @Sinkas in performing such an extensive review. I had a call with them yesterday regarding comments made about our Treasury Working Group, details of which i wanted to share ahead of the review call tonight.
Here are valid concerns raised by @krst about how we operated
-
We did not have an end of season report, just conclusions and a way ahead. I am waiting for my WG co-lead @sids2000 to complete his final deliverable before sharing that; I should have made this clear rather than announcing the conclusions as our wrap-up
-
As program manager, @DisruptionJoe should be keeping us on our toes and telling us the above point, not @krst .
-
Our expertise is not treasury management (I’m a journalist) so he was initially skeptical about how we would lead this group. He’s come around to seeing that we add value by fostering debate & discussion, so he wants to see more frequent, shorter communication over just polished reports.
His invalid point was on separating the budget for our WG (48k ARB) from that of our partners (30k ARB for the research artifacts). The point being, someone might say lets get rid of the WG but keep the partners
As @Aera , @karpatkey & @Avantgarde would attest, we were not absentee managers but spent time in the trenches with them. Their success was our success and separation between their deliverables and our WG is illogical. It costs money to have good managers/marketers for ensuring work commissioned is relevant to our needs and widely disseminated in a digestible format.
Our WG budgeted 20 hours a week from @sids2000 and I for 3 months, at 100 ARB per hour. If we were forced to give a break up on how we spent these hours , here’s some rough numbers
-
30k ARB to each of the partners
-
15k in time we spent onboarding partners, determining agenda, feedback before final release, summaries of report ( 1 2 ) and a tweet thread post release. This includes a recruiting trip I had to make to Berlin dappcon for recruiting Karpatkey and Avant Garde
-
15k towards the STEP framework and the extensive time taken in recruiting the highly qualified committee members, speaking to RWA providers, drafting the framework, holding calls about it, incorporating feedback, etc
-
10k towards @sids2000 analysis in price ceiling analysis and the upcoming CDP research report (still pending)
-
2k to Centrifuge for their report
-
6k in miscellaneous (KYC/admin work, meetings with projects & people reaching out to us about STEP 2/grants, reviews on other proposals etc)
We welcome discussion based on these numbers on whether we’ve delivered sufficient value!