Facts are … we are out of money. Need to tighten up. This is not a time to have “people sitting around waiting to mod”. This is a time for “Who actually needs to be around”.
Sorry to say, but I fully support cutting where it is needed, and this is one area as well.
Similar to what has been mentioned many times, yes we could wait to hear from Sparkly on what she wants.
In terms of language, you also will need to realize that we may enter a scenario where we wont actually be able to cover every language anymore and instead would need to cover the most popular ones. This is the unfortunate part of cutting costs, you just wont be able to have everything you want.
Personally, I believe the usage of mods for security purposes or support in the discord for the time being is more important than language support, which is why I prefer timezones so that there is a mod on duty 24/7. Its useless to have too many mods within the same timezone, and right now we are heavily allocated towards a specific timezone.
If anyone thinks language support is more important, than again please let me know. If enough people think that then maybe that is a better direction. Again, would love to hear from Sparkly what she thinks of this part too. I just want to make sure that when we have much fewer support, that we have support around the clock.
Also keep in mind, this proposal allows Sparkly to still hire mods more than the allocated number, as long as it sticks to the $1,500 budget. Thus, if he wants 5 mods instead of 3, then she can have it, it just reduces the salaries of everyone else by a very minimal amount. The key is to make sure to set a cap on expenses, this is basic budgeting. If we don’t do this, overtime this expense will keep running rampant and increasing without a cap.
Thanks for the input Illest.
Hi @Prof i would really encouraged to speak with sparkly on this
I just remember there are some special work moderators also do on the back end. they had special task not just the language requirements.
need to re -write these.
=====================
in other discussions. will you also pass a proposal to reduce all LG salary to 50% of what they have currently now? .
just wondering .
I was hoping Sparkly would be willing to discuss here. I want to make sure we behave like a DAO and all discussions, especially ones related to public funds, are made public and transparent.
Feel free to pass the proposal you are suggesting. For some reason I have many DMs of people now wanting me to pass many different types of proposals that may hurt some people financially. Do it yourself people, it sucks to do it, this isn’t fun to create a proposal like this and people are going to get annoyed by you, yes. But have some spine and do it yourself.
Not talking directly to you about this Keizer, but please people stop DMing to write proposals for you because you are afraid to write them yourself and care about being liked by others. If we go down under and run out of money, we will forget each other and possibly not talk to each other ever again. Thats why doing whats good for the survival of the project is key and priority.
CU will keep on 2 Keepers and 3 Guardians. These individuals will be selected by the Laguna Games team based on their performance/activity (merit based) an
Suggest just putting a budget since that is the concern and remove the limits put on Guardian. As some of us will remain as volunteers.
And simplifying the details and let the CM have some flexibility to use that budget on the Mod pool however they see fit.
For example, $1500 pool for Keeper and Guardian. That’s it. And let it evolve to however it may be overtime.
This is a very valid point honestly, I think I will be making this change then.
Just waiting to hear back from sparkly before I make any changes. But more likely than not, your change will be made.
Another key thing with moderation is diversity in the mods is also important. Lets hear what Sparkly has to say since she said she will be responding.
Summoning @SparklyUnicorn !!!
Yeap, community managing is a very dynamic situation and nothing is straight forward as we are dealing with humans.
My experience in this is that we would just set a pool, like for this case $1500, then the mod team work it out. We are a front facing circle anyway.
Why? Cause it doesn’t put down too much bureaucracy on the mod circle and just let them do their work and vibe with the community. TL:DR Less LinkedIn Bros, more into the Culture.
Let me weigh in as someone that created that Guardian and Keeper system prior to having any reward attached to them.
At current times, more guidelines just creates friction and burden. Prefer to just set a pool and let the rest work out between the already squeezed circle.
You’re just gating the circle with Bountry Structures.
To be clear, this is more of a constitutional requirement than a personal thing.
- (ii) Grant Proposals shall be accompanied by a disbursement schedule, wherein the majority of the grant shall be disbursed only upon the fulfillment of specified milestones, or after a service has been rendered or an output delivered. An initial allocation, constituting less than 10% of the total grant, may be proposed to support initial operations, subject to approval by the DAO.
The bounty structures allow for a written way to determine the output.
Basically, the main point I was making is to keep the Discord role separate regardless of where the reward discussion lands.
And look how the constitutional thing brought us here, do we really want to go down the path of having everything gated with guidelines or be innovative without restriction and try out stuff that works and adapt?
I’m down with the path of being a Web3 Maverick and enough with the LinkedIn bros culture of having everything in corpo culture.
I have no preference at this point on the reward topic but only expounded on the presented options and sharing the process-side.
My response is mostly about suggesting to keep the Discord roles unchanged while adjusting only the rewards - however the DAO may decide to do it. It just leaves a bad taste for the roles to be removed, imo.
On this note, I rest my case.
Prefer to just set a pool and let the rest work out between the already squeezed circle.
Can you please explain what you mean with this Terra? I personally do not want Keepers/Mods selecting the newer mods. It creates bad politics and gives the Keepers/Mods power that they shouldn’t have. This is why I want this decision to be made by LG CM team. In case I understood it wrong, please correct me.
I want to make sure that besides just the pay, the people selected are diversified as well to give people from different regions also an opportunity to carry out that role. Also, I like the idea of people carrying out that role in a volunteer capacity (which is very common in many discords), if they still want to do it and the 1,500 is fully allocated.
Historically CM teams would decide things on the back end as LG is trying to run things with guidelines with inputs from the mods, back then it made sense BUT with how things are running now, where everything has gone down the drain and needs a restart I would avoid trying to base on pass events and look forward to just maintain things on this front [Community Modding].
As for diversity we are but I don’t think we are trying to be DEI and with this tight budget constraint and the situation we have with the project. Prefer it to be lax and remain with what we have at the moment till we can all pick ourself back up.
Any further wishy washy stuff will be just a dream assuming if one assume some magical proposal would save the project.
Everything we are doing now is against whatever we are doing in the pass.
Hi Prof!
Prefacing this with a reminder that I don’t speak for the mods or LG as a whole, these are just my thoughts as the CM for Laguna Games.
In light of the current treasury, this proposal makes sense and is reasonable. We currently have a smaller than usual workload for moderation while the on-chain game is being built. Once the on-chain game is ready for marketing and community and if it needs a greater budget for moderation, I’m confident we can create another proposal to increase the budget as needed.
I’ll have to agree with the following points made by Nanessa and Terra:
Here are my thoughts on the matter:
Please let me know if there are any other questions I can answer for you!
I’m inclined to agree with Sparkly’s suggestion of something closer to $2.5k.
This is a tricky one, but the keepers and guardians have been a helpful / consistent presence in the community. While budgets are tight, I would hate for us to start losing that core group that engages with newcomers.
Where I see this could be a thing in the future, there are 0 newcomers atm and I highly doubt we will expect any newcomers until the the on chain game is out, which is another 90 days out. The Proposal wont take into effect until October anyways, which will allow us to gage how things are at until then. Obviously, if the work is heavy and there is much to be done, as mentioned another proposal can be very easily made to handle this. Spoke to Sparkly about the logic behind this as well.
In agreement here but understand the community’s desire to reduce costs. Ultimately, going to let community take the lead on this one.