In my view, Owl’s in the thread are acting rationally and the system is still not working - forcing communication into forums that are not well-suited to resolution. I’m using this communication failure to elevate a previous suggestion to a broad request. For context, part of my response to the F.Nest Proposal this quarter:
Pain at these levels should not be the threshold for process improvement. This has been and continues to be a problem no matter the form the rewards process has taken over the last 6 months. Please provide a regularly scheduled meeting as a way for contributors to engage with your WG/Nest and provide feedback. Y’all do a great job of communicating out, but not at actively engaging with the community your nest supports. It’s not enough to be good at what you do, you need to engage within this DAO with more empathy by actively listening as well as being heard; the current feedback loop is not working. F.Nest is most empowered to solve this problem, but it needs to be a conversation and that’s not being allowed to take place.
Areas that could use attention:
- Clear(er) communication that unless work has been expressly agreed to be rewarded, it is at risk of being unrewarded given that it’s PURELY WGL DISCRETION as it stands. If a view develops that WGLs are allowing/encouraging work that will not be rewarded it’s massively problematic.
- Communication of reward ahead of drop (it’s weird that we find out WHAT we’re getting paid WHEN we get paid). WGLs should communicate these decisions ahead and make themselves available to discuss.
- Better guidance on best practices for WGLs around proper communication and responsibilities.
- Toil in daylight whenever possible.
- An avenue for resolution that is divorced from those carrying out the problematic process.
- IMMEDIATE resolution via payment if a greater/additional reward is the result of a dispute (it’s been earned and should be paid out accordingly, not the following month).
- If we’re calling it what it is, despite the skeezy tradfi vibes, we’re submitting timesheets. Monthly. It’s too long to go to find out that whatever you’ve been up to is not going to be rewarded. Shorten the feedback loop. I’d like to see this move to every two weeks in keeping with the skeezt tradfi standard it mimics. Build more frequent feedback into the process. In the meantime maybe Copper and Bronze Owls can “submit” weekly to WGLs for feedback ahead of the monthly.
In keeping, I will not be supporting any WGs next term that do not have at least monthly open meetings until there a communication standard for functional areas within the DAO, as reporting and weekly-planning-call updates alone are not sufficient. In my view I’m being forced to think async through problems at a granular level that were delegated to this nest to solve - happy to keep doing it in an open, regularly scheduled, and synced discussion format.
Noting that F.Nest just absorbed the contributor reward function from FC, and with it this elevated need for increased contributor engagement; I’m not taking issue with the way things have been run, but it’s time for a change. Also noting that EWG and TOC have not had open business meetings in some time and I’d like to see that change.
cc: @Matthew_Graham @ElliottWatts @Pepperoni_Joe @bradwmorris @edwardk @dylan