Community Ownership | Retroactive airdrop to historical contributors

[Thomas_Hepner]

Wow!

I’m honestly blown away by the collaboration, thoughtfulness, and attention to detail given to the Compensation and Community Ownership by @0x_Dev, @Pepperoni_Joe, @Metfanmike, and the rest of the team that put helped put this together. Thank you!!

Frankly, I’ve been feeling skeptical for months that Index Coop would be able to slay Moloch, the god of coordination failure. After reading this and the subsequent posts I’m feeling that Index Coop is on the “right track” to solving its internal coordination problems.

Overall, I am in support of the broad strokes of this proposal and plan to vote FOR after the details have been ironed out.

This really resonated with me and is the key reason why we are a DAO/Cooperative, not a traditional company.

@0x_Dev

Background: what is ‘community ownership’ and why is it important?
Community ownership is what it says on the tin: ownership of a protocol substantially spread around its contributors and users, who have influence over the direction of the protocol - in contrast to TradFi, where companies are owned by insiders, privileged and/or larger investors and where little stake and, crucially, influence is held by the typical employee. DAOs and protocols represent new vehicles for harnessing human talent and potential, seeking to evolve from the most efficient vehicle for the last few hundred years til today - the joint stock company.

A specific tweak I would make to the proposal:

Add impression mining rewards to the retroactive airdrop and dynamic staking programs.

@Crypto_Texan has been one of the most valuable IC contributors and not including the outsized impact of his work through the impression mining program would be a mistake.

Compensation & Community Ownership - Next Steps

Wondering if rewards distributed from the Impression Mining program are being considered in this calculation as well?

Addional Note - DATA Methodologist Special Situation:

I think it is well-known, and been acknowledged in other places in forum, that @Kiba and myself are clearly in a special situation / grey area with DATA Index.

I do not expect our special situation to be resolved in the Retroactive airdrop, and plan to vote FOR this proposal regardless of the outcome from the Methodologist framework discussions, but wanted to highlight this for @BigSky7, @Pepperoni_Joe, @Metfanmike, @fallow8, and others who I know are working hard to resolve coordination problems across the Coop.

So my comment below is just intended to increase the salience of our special situation to the relevant parties for the Methodologist Framework conversations.

As methodologists, we have not received contributor rewards for our work on DATA Index, have not received anywhere near the same level of support (including financial) for launch and post-launch as other products, and have been effectively locked out of the Methodologist Bounty program.

We are not earning material ownership in Index Coop by growing DATA Index, but are still only earning a 30% fee split from DATA Index.

We look forward to continued collaboration with Index Coop to resolve these coordination problems with these principles in mind:

@BigSky7

In partnering with methodologists, we strive to maintain these principles.

1. Focus on collaboration with clear roles and outcomes
2. Ensure that Index Coop is a reliable partner to build a long-term business with
3. Build with sustainable product economics that fairly reflect responsibilities
4. Maintain clear and effective communication across all parties

Once again, thank you for your tremendous effort to slay Moloch at IC!!!