There’s a lot to cover in this, a lot of it (seemingly) unrelated to the topic of the forum post.
I would love to chat in our 1-on-1 tomorrow about it some more so I can fully understand your perspective.
I had not given it serious thought (beyond the principles) because I was waiting to see how community would respond and actually my comment as the conversation over Discord with @jdcook who said he was excited to see it shared and the resulting discussion that would ensue.
Frankly, I’m confused and disappointed that my ideas were completely disregarded in your response to my analysis.
Firstly, I don’t know how compensation for CREAM is related to DATA other than that @Kiba and myself are the most frequent posters on both topics.
Secondly, I largely agree with Nassim’s comments about the Community Methodologist Program. I think having a streaming fee included as part of your comp would have produced better incentive alignment. I voted for the Community Methodologist proposal at the time because I thought it was more important to have you and @verto0912 on-board maintaining and developing MVI than the specific details of the proposal.
I’m glad we have you both as contributors to the Coop and as Community Methodologists aside from any other concern about incentive structures. I value what you both do. 
This simply is not true. I’ve heard this multiple times from different people in different contexts and it saddens me greatly to see that our contributions have not been noticed. @Kiba and I have both been actively involved in the Index Coop since 2020. In the past three months alone we’ve done the following:
- Google Slides Presentation for Community Call
- Forward to DG2
- IIP-55: Data Economy Index
- Request for Comment
- Request for Discussion
Kiba also worked on Intrinsic Productivity (which I helped with) and I helped form the Autonomy Working Group.
There is a lot more “behind-the-scenes” work we’ve both done that is just not visible in forum posts or community calls.
Just because we are not trying to be FT contributors does not mean we are not contributing. Please see my comment here for more context about my own personal motivations.
It’s not a threat to say you will not work under certain terms and conditions. @Matthew_Graham saying on a community call that he was planning to “scale back from the Index Coop” if things did not change in a direction towards Autonomy is not a threat. It’s not a threat to ask for compensation you think is fair, and walk away if the negotiating partner is unwilling to meet your terms.
I’m not sure what these insults are. I have not personally seen them.
My feeling here is that yourself and other community members personally do not like @Kiba because of disparaging/insulting comments he has made, some of which I have seen and others I have not. Is this fair? If that’s the case, I think we should deal with community conduct separately from fair compensation discussions.
Is there a proposal being worked on somewhere? If so, this is the first I’ve heard of it, in which case, we probably are just having a communication issues. 
Regardless, it is not Transparent to me who is involved in making these decisions or why our suggestions/ideas are (seemingly) being dismissed?