I value your thoughtful input.
The LIP is faaaaar from optional. It is a fight from the corner and uphill. It is the battle of a new baby DAO, based on anons, against the market in its state of fear and uncertainty. It is a battle to find its stable position in crypto, which (even in our waters) became more based on cult figures and quick coin flipping.
We used all the strings we had as a combination of anon core creating an opportunity for the new raising community, combined knowledge, verifiable code, the Sentinel setup and trust building marketing etc and last but not least, shared some initial roadmap including several privacy solutions and teams to deliver them (read investment possibilities).
Almost all Objectives and Key Results were met,except one - the main one - RAISE > 700ETH. We can analyze why this happened, why are we in the moment that value and wealth is misunderstood with immediate profit, instead of seeing profit as a part of wealth, where the value is also given to the infrastructure and people building that.
We can feel bitter and unfair about it, but that would prevent us from sober analysis and moving forward. In the end we build this up and if we didn’t meet even 10% of the minimum ETH target - we failed.
On the other hand to say we failed and we have to do better won’t solve the situation as 6 ppl worked 6+ months full time, another ~10 people contributed as they believed that this will increase possibilities for freedom and with our promise that once we launch we will get them paid. Not overpaid, not perhaps a normal rate paid at first, but somehow paid. That’s why the proposal was 30% for externals (sys admin, web admin, graphic, dev, ai operator, lpf host, lawyers, translator) and 15% for stewards (setting up the structure, researching the dao, summoning, media, management of allies, community, getting services running, marketing etc etc). Lastly part of the LIP was to pay the initial loan (7.075 ETH minus what is still in steward multisig = 6.1686 ETH) which was used to pay domains, vps, web3 and ui dev deposit, gas to summon the dao, and some promotion/marketing.
As you said, even this is at this point 50% of the DAO. Are we in a point that we see value in this to a degree that we are willing to dilute shares and pay this and make everyone at least somehow happy (however it’s far from optional to the investors as well as to the contributors)? @loading_wait and @yvesedwards were positive on the valuation of this proposal (none of the two is currently receiving any of the compensation fyi) and few had joined that.
Meanwhile others had seen this as too high and few had exited the DAO completely.
Thankfully the Squad has been taking initiative and brings ideas, such as LIP-0004, the $LUNAR community token proposal (which we have all the contracts and UI ready, just need to agree and make a decent tokenomics and plan and not rush it) etc.
I am worried that the risk of more people exiting the DAO is too high. That would result us fighting the battle from the corner uphill even weaker. It seems that this is not a time to fight harder till the last one standing but smarter. As lunarpunks we are guerrilla - partisans using the forests of encryption to move. We will never be able to line up millions to face the tyrants out in the desert. We don’t play their game as they never asked us if if want to play theirs neither.
With all that said, we see the trust and the commitment many here showed and want to keep working towards freedom together. In practice this means painful weeks of calls to people who put their hearts to the DAO and explaining that we just can’t pay anything now but will do as soon as possible. Discussing with some of the stewards how few of us can afford to continue the way we did etc.
I don’t see this proposal as not paying back or not giving value to those people, but as a shift in timing and strategy based on the reality of the DAO and your all’s feedback. to do it right for the DAO, including it’s key contributors and founders.
If there is a sentiment that we all can afford more - in $VOX or $VOX-LOOT - so the ETH stays in the treasury and the proposal of $FIRN purchase can still go through, we all are more than happy to ask for a bit more.
I am holding back with submitting the numbers on chain just yet and looking forward for more input.
Last note on the $VOX/$VOX-LOOT instead of paying ETH. es, everyone asked is fine with that solution. These people supported (by passing on ETH or time/effort) the DAO in times when all of this was just a crazy idea. They all have highest incentive to receive and hold shares over ETH. In fact some of them would like that better as they couldn’t join the raise with more than minimum because they simply didn’t have more for the above mentioned reasons.
I hope this explained.