for example,
someone in Nigeria, who has the biggest crypto acceptance and usage in the last 2 years around the world…
has already proven lots of work done, also done IRL events out of their own pockets to promote JUP,
my man was asking for peanuts, 10 grand or 20 grand at most,
for doing actual real work,
nobody pay him any atention, and they gave him cheap excuses,
yet people who already are getting paid tones, are asking for like a million, more???
this is actual proff of what you are saying in your statement,
further more, is someone or anyone from the team interacting with the comunity here?? not really. they are not discusing or engaging with the comunity…
they are just hyping on discord,
from witch i got kicked out of this discord family,
for talking back to this modern bullies who play the victim,
so much for comunity and PPP…
it is all a joke,
real people voicing real concerns with no aswers back,
and bots yas hyping and been yes men.
let me add, they call themselfs top class world elite smart people, with no proff of this whatsoever, except from big empty wording,
are they like polititians, or marketing students???
my opinion, and non of them debated or refuted my opinion…
they scared to debate and be truly honest…
Appreciate your perspective on this. The reality here is that we are not making any assumptions around price of JUP here, and also, for most of us, we actually left jobs with higher immediate benefits and less risk to work on this. I understand your sentiment here however but this is really a reflection of a more general global disparity and job disparity across web3 rather than something we can focus on to tackle with our specific vote. We are not trying to be unreasonable with our asks — it’s clearly lower than what other WGs are receiving already, which we did to take into account the market conditions. The flip side of things is that, Jupiter needs to also innovate when times aren’t great, and there’s really a lot of work that is being done and can be done on the community side and within the Jupiverse to push things forward and make JUP more important.
For some of your points about voting power distribution — I do not have the answers to them, but as the data is on-chain I do believe there are explorers such as catalytics.pro that you can use to look into the voter data.
The team members are great, but wouldn’t it be more effective to hire specialists for social media and marketing people with more experience at a much lower cost? The $5,200 per month salary could realistically be reduced to around $900–$1,200 for these roles. In fact, the other four positions could be filled at a fraction of the proposed cost.
That said, I do agree with Julz receiving $5,200 since he’s handling the most critical responsibilities. Don’t get me wrong I respect the team and their contributions. However, from a cost-efficiency standpoint, even with the vesting and cliff over 3.5 years, the total amount is quite significant and could have a major impact on $JUP itself.
I’m not sure what’s the best way to explain, but social-media specialists will not be here for the amounts you are mentioning and have the same patience, understanding of context around Jupiter, the kind of creativity and founder energy, that I have seen from these members.
Not to mention that a lot of the scope also falls outside of social media.
I mean I understand where you’re coming from but you can make the same reductionist argument for any job. One can say that all programmer should be fired and replaced with AI which is cheaper. There’s definitely some measure of truth in every comparison like that, but at the same time it also misses the point that the fringe skills and the ability to take ownership responsibility of something and care about it so much as these guys do is what we are actually paying for.
I voted ‘for’ this proposal.
I’m not a gigabrain so I’ll leave the numbers to those more qualified.
I like the idea of CAWG being like fuel to the fire that is Jupiverse. Growing an active community will only help send JUP higher.
Thanks for your response, julianhzhu.
The reason I’m asking these questions is that catalytics.pro doesn’t provide answers to some of them.
For example, if the whales in this project vote for a single option, and that already constitutes the majority of votes, then effectively, all decisions are controlled—at least to some extent—by 41 wallets, not by the broader community, as I previously commented.
I’m not against salaries; perhaps those income levels are indeed justified. However, a bonus in tokens shouldn’t just be a payout for simply being in the company and doing your job. Your work is already compensated at a market-competitive level. A bonus should have specific success criteria for both individuals and the team as a whole.
One of these success criteria could very well be the token price. MEOW locked its tokens precisely based on the token price metric, hiring teams of specialists with an additional bonus in Jupiter tokens. So why not offer team members roughly the same conditions for receiving bonuses (with Cliff & Vesting, of course)? That way, everyone would be in the same boat and genuinely working toward increasing the token’s value.
Also, why don’t you make any assumptions about the price of JUP? What, in your opinion, should serve as a reference point for everyone?
He did not — it was removed due to legal complications. The same reasons why any DAO employee cannot make references of such etc.
With regards to the bonus, the check and balance is in place via accountability vote that will happen before the year’s JUP is disbursed. Hope that clarifies a little.
“Budget/Ask: Full year, $462,000 USDC (Salaries: $312k for 5 members full-time, $5,200 per member + Community Budget: $150k) & 750,000 $JUP (150k JUP per member, 1 year cliff, vested over 2.5 years)”
Jupiter craziness seems to continue and outrageous salaries and spreading of free gift JUP continues.
First of all that salary alone is outrageous and on top of that you get 150.000 JUP? For what? That is double reward.
I vote NO.
For the good of Jupiter long term: It’s a No for me
I think anyone who’s bullish on Jupiter needs to send this thing back to the drawing board.
In short: There’s a lotta heart (and the intention is good) but not a lot of practicality.
There is one product I can see in all of this, the Appurrciation system, and the rest isn’t supporting anything Jupiter currently makes money from.
Jupiter makes trading tools. It grows by onboarding traders. Not community members, but traders. Some of those are community members no doubt but it’s not a requirement.
Should Jupiter expand it’s product range? Yes.
That kind of focus would look a lot different to what this is. Probably that’s a venture fund connected to hackathons and grants.
Not particularly exciting or new but that’s how you bootstrap new apps.
For the amount of spend proposed here you could build and bootstrap an entire web3 social media platform. I’ve sent decent such platforms today built for a lot less (Kaichi and Bulb spring to mind, but you could add others). That would be something I’d be behind as it would give a practical application for all this well intentioned effort. And possibly that’s what Jupiter should do: Invest in building social apps for Solana and other blockchains as those are an edge compared to the trading dominated ecosystem we see today.
And if you did have that focus you’d have a reason to do most of the things being proposed here as those apps do directly benefit from building user bases via communities.
This looks so much like the last 3 years of Polkadot marketing spend (and you can replace ‘Polkadot’ with a number of other dead or dying L1s) it’s frightening. Polkadot is at LEAST an ecosystem, so you could make some justification to their marketing spend (as it’s such a broad “product”), but it’s widely acknowledged that was mostly completely wasted.
To reiterate: For the good of Jupiter long term, I’m voting No.
(And to be clear: I’m convinced this is all coming from a good place. But feelings aren’t enough to base an entire start-up funding allocation on).
I hear where you’re coming from. One thing CAWG’s been good at is staying nimble and rolling out new concepts that meet actual community and product needs as they come up. Last year, the community needed product tutorials and better education — so we helped spin up DeFi Jup Jam, and now they’re a solid team focused on exactly that. Same with granting JUP & Juice. Our model on this side of things is simple: identify gaps, bootstrap solutions, let them grow.
We actually agree there needs to be more focus there, and that’s why part of this next phase is growing teams that can support devs, host product jams - Recently, we have seen Jupiter DevRel take for as an early grant. Part of the CAWGs mandate is to support these teams.
Taking a look at the social media side, we have similar ambitions. The goal of the appurrciation system, is to connect the walled gardens of ALL social media sites that are currently being used in our community.
Again, I think there are some misunderstandings here. The CAWG was formed by the core jupiter community over several months last year. Following that, we had a full vote for this WG to move forward as a trial. This is for us to renew our contract and continue working. Looking at the democratic process, this vote is that in work.
The catdets process is fully open and not something left in shade. Please check our docs out at JUP Catdets to learn more about the role. Anyone can be a catdet.
Finally, our goal here is not at all power centralization, quite the opposite. We want to empower community members to do their own thing and help them kickstart their work. We have setup a smaller voting system for more “low stakes” DAO discussions to happen with a diverse set of community members.
also - we are not anonymous at all, we are live every tuesday, thursday, and sunday in the discord
Make your goal to onboard an institutional investor with greater than 500million AUM or marketcap if a publicly traded company. Do that, and you’ve done something and should be very handsomely rewarded in JUP. This is just backslaps and pretense at identity because we own tokens and use a product. Voting no.
There’s some misunderstanding here that the proposal is about marketing Jupiter or JUP, it’s fundamentally at the core, not.
We are working on something much more fundamental, and that is creating the environment and conditions where groups of individuals can thrive and become productive together towards the growth of Jupiter and the Jupiverse.
Sure JUP as a token has its coordination value and functions, but imo that’s just scratching the surface of things. The CAWG is in the business of growing leaders and fostering social capital in the community, and these are key pieces that will take Jupiter and JUP further in the long-term.
