Based on the work results demonstrated by the team, it’s not evident that the team has the capability to develop a website that meets the project requirements. From the basic content planning and UI design presented so far, both V1 and V2 seem to be stuck at a level reminiscent of the last century. While streamlining information dissemination channels and optimizing and integrating information are crucial, it doesn’t seem like the current team has the capacity to do so.
Integrating information and enhancing communication among DAO members can easily be achieved using existing resources, without the need to develop an entirely new website. I believe the focus should be on leveraging existing information dissemination channels, consolidating resources, and optimizing section layouts to achieve the goal.
Even if an impressive website were developed, due to people’s ingrained habits of obtaining Jupiter information, the website would likely remain idle, ultimately resulting in the project being abandoned.
Why would you need a shift rotation though? SLA and uptime is what hosting provider takes care of, webflow in this case, via AWS. Moreover, I do not think it is critical for jup.eco if it goes down for a few hours, even if that very unlikely event occurs. It’s not like Solana breaking for a few days. If more technologically complex stuff is planned after the trial, then I would suggest to at least properly evaluate the costs for the trial period’s scope, they do not seem adequate to me.
Ah, apologies then. I thought you meant website uptime. Updating content on the website at the time it is available in other sources is indeed crucial, I agree. But perhaps some of the most important updates could be automatically pulled from Twitter or Discord, which you mentioned is in plans.
ecosystem channel is the first thing I go to for learning more about the project im interested in. and given the scope and amount of information from the JUP ecosystem this makes it a monumental task. if done correctly this would help to grow the pie no doubt and i would like to help with development. most concerns seem to be around the team/costs involved and if this will be valuable/used and not abandoned. did dm sirnaynay with my credentials and said i don’t expect to get paid I want to help) perhaps get what/how the community wants to build this and delivering fast incremental releases would help to gain trust. all work must be paid but also the work must be in alignment with what people actually see them using. happy to talk some more find me on discord prasmalla (meowtoshi)
This is the approach I like to see. Let me show you what I can do and if you find value in it, then let’s talk money. I’m all for paying people who provide value and I appreciate people who are willing to prove themselves.
To your point, there are softwares out there (I can point some) that will enable you to prompt engineer your website, and voila, it will generate you a ready-made website. I’m not just talking about half-baked websites generated by AI. I’m talking about professional websites developed in minutes.
It’s not a $15,000 work. I’m really sorry to say. An AI-generated website may be able to do far better, for far less cheaper (iota of that $15,000 cost)
I’d agree with your point. The cost alone to “complete the project” is huge. Plus, the important metrics of all that wasn’t discussed was analytics. Having involved in multiple businesses, isn’t analytics tracking a viable information to have?
If we are to grow the pie, there ought to be a measurement of our progress. Needless to say, said tracking analytics should belong to the DAO. It will be our DAO’s asset so there should be no contestation of who will own it in the future should your work be finished.
I think that the breakdown is fine, but the “retroactive pay” should be already included in what they are asking for salary wise. Essentially- marking their original ($56,500 budget) salaries as 4 months pay, instead of 3 (instead of asking for an additional $15k “retroactive pay”). We just assume they started in April and then are working for 4 months time.
Breakdown would be like so;
Antimatter - full-time @ $5.625k per month (for 4 months) = $22.5k
Sirnaynay - full-time @ $5.625k per month (for 4 months) = $22.5k
Hanko - part-time @ $2.8125k per month (for 4 months) = $11.5k
This seems more in line with what we are asking of them from my personal perspective- at about $35.15/hour suggesting a 40h work week. Other than that everything looks amazing.
Is there a financial controller for the DAO? How is the compensation being benchmarked? Why are these resources being compensated at these exaggerated levels?
Jupiter is doing the right things. But the best ideas fail when they are extravagant with their resources. Guys. Get this ship under control.
Hey team, a few questions / suggestions for this overall (posting this to all working groups):
Separate the purpose, work and budget. Let’s agree on the purpose first (why are we doing this?), then get into the actual work (the how) and the costs. I don’t see a lot of people in here so I don’t know how this is done, but my sense is we are just throwing money around and hoping something works. This process would not work in most startups, and we should be careful here.
Costs - when we propose salaries, I think it’s fair to say where the people are based. Job pay is not equal globally, as cost of living is not equal. $6K/mo is pretty good for many places but what if we could get the roles filled in lower cost areas? Are we paying people in SF (or here in London) where costs are insanely high, or people in other areas where $6K is in the top 90%tile of pay. I’m not against paying people what they are worth (they should be paid, they are doing good work!) but I have zero context for who/where/howmuch these devs should be paid.
People - while these proposals are coming from the people who want to do the work, I wonder how we evaluate them against others? It is “first come, first served?” Could we not make a job description and then let people in the community apply/interview for this? I know this is a DAO but we may not be allowing time/openness to see what the market looks like.
If we’re going to have multiple proposals at once, can we make sure all use the same template, so it’s easier to judge the value proposed across various initiatives? Otherwise I could see a rise of proposals flood in and very little clarity on how this all works.
Thanks for reading and considering these thoughts.
I think the point about the long-term vision for this is a really salient one. You don’t create a website or platform and just think about the resourcing for 3 months. What’s the long-term vision and budget? There’s reference in the comments to longer-term web3 integration, but I don’t see mention of it in the proposal.
I understand this may be a trial period to build something for further iterative assessment and development, but if so, what are the parameters for assessment in a few months? What goals (eg level of engagement?) are you trying to achieve, and how will success/failure be assessed?
With more clarity on these items, I would be better able to understand the long-term vision, plan and commitment.
i agree with basically all the “budget is way too high” + “backpay is absurd” comments.
this is a cool resource, but not vital in any sense, and certainly not worth what’s being asked, imo
…unless you’re all in a metropolitan area in new york or california or something. but in that case… just outsource the work to anywhere else to bring the costs way down. also, no need to put overqualified people on this job, if that’s the reason why the budget has to be so high.
there must be existing platforms that can fulfill most of the proposed ideas for a very small fraction of the cost, no? then if/when something gains traction, maybe that’d warrant the creation and maintenance of a more customized platform/site
**eg. newsletter for social/project updates, any of the many calendar options for events, a notion-like platform for summaries/transcripts/guides/whatever, reddit/forums for communication/collaboration, a youtube channel for DAO University. **
i could go set all that up in a day or two for just the cost of domains and maybe a “pro plan” or two
this would be a pretty solid proposal in 2021, and maybe even under-budgeted lol, but you immediately lost me at “backpay” and then the rest of the proposal just made my perception of this proposal worse
I’ve decided not to support this proposal in its current state, as I still have some concerns:
The cost of the budget request is very high. I would like to learn more about how you determined this number in detail, as I mentioned previously regarding the rates for the working group.
How many hours are you willing to commit to this, both full-time and part-time?
How can we evaluate the success of this working group? What will be the KPIs for this?
I also agree with @chasemax regarding the transparency about back pay. The requested amount seems very high.
I’m still open to feedback and additional details. I hope you can provide more information on my concerns and help me understand more! Thanks, guys.
I just want to say one thing apart from the fact that this is the very kind of resource that I am looking for. “You get what you pay for and pay for what you get” so in this case considering salaries-I want workgroup builders to feel satisfied and motivated by their salaries
Hi, I’m Tim. The past eight months in Jupiter have flown by. I became a Catdet five months ago and have been with Web Working Group as a contributor for three months. With a background in Computer Science and a day job in automation at a bank, I bring a technical perspective to my role. My responsibilities include managing the Jup.Eco Twitter account, gathering information, writing for Space Station and jup.eco, and strategizing with the team.