Transparency and accountability are always good. “Policing” not so much. This is a DPOS system and the DHF is stake based.
There absolutely should be an effort to communicate and show the work done. In open source development that’s easy as there are applications like github that can easily document some work.. but not how many hours someone spent to code that commit. How would one show that?
Individuals who understand development would understand the work that goes into some aspects of it, then others like the little pink man here, knows nothing but tweeting and doesn’t even understand that a blockchain core developer is extremely hard to come by and charges quite a lot.
So a daily log to tell every hour spent seems a bit odd as that’s not required in any other aspect of the industry. The end result is the work done. Who cares if it took one developer 20hrs to get there if a better one could do it in 10? Is the end result the same? Did the community benefit the same?
So I think these details are something the community needs to consider. It’s ok to not understand many aspects of development, but it’s then a bit strange to pretend they do and state what they feel is an acceptable payment.
Perhaps along with these “guidelines” Some research should be done into going rates for the specific work done, and not just compare it to some wage that has nothing to do with the work being done. That way the community has something to base it off of.
For closed source work on individual projects that’s even more complicated as the project could leave at any time. Perhaps a look at how best to handle those aspects would be good as well.
More focus on the type of work and how it benefits the ecosystem and less factors on the amount.
As far as non development work that’s even more complex as there is no github commits, or code to show for it.
In many aspects, like with exchange negotiations, you couldn’t even make a daily log to detail all aspects as this would cause a riff in the relationship with the exchange and could result in either delisting or exchanges being less willing to work work with the project. Many actually ask you to sign individual NDA’s to even talk to them. So how to we document every aspect of that and “show work” without causing issues that would be negative to the community?
These are things we need to figure out going forward, for both dev and non dev aspects and I think it’s a good discussion to have. I do think it’s important to get relevant facts about it though before the community starts policing or proclaiming what is correct and what is not.
Hopefully we can continue to move forward and figure this all out in a decentralized method. As we are discovering though, organizing in decentralized way is not easy.
Thanks for your input. I don't presume to have all the answers, but I agree these discussions will be more important going forward. It is also worth mentioning if proposals were tied to more concrete milestones and deliverables, the tracking of time would be less crucial.