Proposal Abuse Alert
I normally would not call out someone specifically but after enough research I am more convinced our governance model around proposals is broken and requires serious revamping that I'll be the first to admit I am not personally capable of doing.
First, I'd like to break this down for the average salary an American blockchain developer would make around Andrew aka netuoso's domicile, because Andrew (aka Netuoso) is currently living in the USA (per his Linkedin).
- Here is a table from Google what current Blockchain developers are compensated annually...
According to census data, the average income Netuoso should hope to earn based on where he lives is around $150,000 (conservatively)
Here is the linkedin profile of the talent we elected to hire as a "full-time" developer of our blockchain through the DAO / DHF (whatever you want to call it, the decentralized fund)
Source: Linkedin Profile
At the moment, Andrew aka Netuoso is earning 275 HBD a day or about 100k USD per year; however, from his linkedin this is not his only job, he is currently a CEO of another company...
Source: Linkedin Profile
In my experience, I've learned to make any serious change is to get executive support. The executives in a decentralized infrastructure are different; so, I am choosing to call out all the Hive users and users I believe are supporting in the exploitation of our system. The anecdote I am highlighting here is the proposal being funded by @netuoso who is currently being paid 275 HBD daily.
The current supporters of of @netuoso are as follows (in millions):
... and 248 more
The fact is his proposal is earning him 100k almost in-line with what a full time blockchain developer would hope to earn in his geographic area. At the same time, he is working as a CEO of another company taking away time from his ability to support his Hive development as promised in his proposal.
The issue at hand is accountability. There is no one to say that this time conflicts with his ability to perform against to promises he were granted from the approved DHF / DAO Hive proposal granted to him which accounts for 100k USD or 75% of what a full time blockchain developer would hope to make in his same geographic region.
At the same time, his linkedin profile isn't all that impressive. He doesn't even seem he has a college degree, but I'm not saying that sets any sort of standard; however, it can act as a baseline on what the DAO should expect to pay for the same level of talent.
I'm not going to disclose the information I'm privileged to but it's mentioned that other key stakeholders have questioned the value that Netuoso has afforded to hive by @therealwolf and others. I know I am calling you out specifically, but I'm not citing screenshots of chat channels I've observed that cite this point.
I'm open to to the benefit of doubt but I'd like to hear the concerns of other Hive stakeholders, but most importantly other Hive users as follows:
Accountability is Essential
I believe accountability is essential for every stakeholder of Hive. In my opinion, every Hive user wants more Hive users, but most importantly we want more money staked to Hive. That's because at this point, we've all learned that when real value comes to Hive. If we do not have the ability to monitor the people getting paid from the DAO / DHF, then there is no way to hold them accountable. A 3 month project could take 3 years and no one is expected to ask why. That's a problem because someone has to be asking why!
Who is holding awardees of Hive proposals accountable? The answer is that nobody is.
I've been debating with myself whether to bring this issue up in public but after the post below I thought it was appropriate to bring to the attention of Hive users but specifically those addressed in this post.
I encourage anyone who reads this to directly comment on this thread so that your voice is heard. At this point, I believe this is critical because presently, Hive lacks the accountability to manage against any exploitation of the DAO / DHF funds effectively.
The post from cited from netuoso highlights that there are serious questions whether awardees of Hive proposals are milking Hive.
Whether it's 50k HBD or 1m HBD it makes no difference because we should not allow such a system to be so easily exploited and misunderstood by the voters who award these funds.
Governance is Essential
In the short term, I believe we should enforce accountability and set an example of Netuoso but I would prefer that top witnesses decide upon this as an interim solution since we lack the governance structure to do anything about this.
What Are Your Thoughts?
I'm curious to hear comments from other Hive stakeholders, because I don't think I'm the only one and this material weakness can't be ignored. I think this is only the beginning and prevents the development of a real catalyst to be created through the compensation the DAO / DFH otherwise allows for a sustainable Hive growth model.
The only way Hive grows is through proper compensation and no one wants to stake that, that's what the DAO / DHF is for, right?
The ask here is that I would like the supporters of his proposal to seriously consider whether he is contributing the value that is promised. In Netuoso's last post other users have claimed that he hasn't done any development for 4 months, and I don't believe this is acceptable.
No Hive developer holds a monopoly on Hive, their talents can be replaced. I'm sure Netuoso has contributed to Hive, but is it worth the value asked for? Is that the system we want to continue to allow? Do we want to make it so easy to question the integrity of the growth of Hive?
Presently we hardly have any real full time development. Sure there are many volunteers contributing to coding Hive, but people being paid by the DAO / DHF should be held to a different standard.
I don't think it's practical for the voters to assess value and do the investigation required and perform the due diligence required to assess their value.