Retroactive compensation for community moderators

Proposals
1

Header

Title: Retroactive Compensation for community moderators
Author(s): Britt
Status: RFC

Body

Summary:
This proposal is meant to retroactively compensate community moderators for their efforts between the token launch and now. I’ve identified 3 individuals who I believe should be compensated.

Motivation:
The Across community has always been relatively laid back and spam-free. Historically we’ve had a volunteer moderator model, where people who have been around for a while gained the ability to help maintain the atmosphere of the community. In combination with our paid dev support folks, this level of occasional contribution was something that could be done by several people without creating a gap in community support.

This type of activity was rewarded in the community portion of the token launch, but no payments have since been made to our community moderators. While some of our community moderators are still irregularly active, there are a few who have been working consistently, and I believe their efforts deserve to be compensated. These are folks who I’d like to see stick around, and I believe this offers us an opportunity to show our gratitude to them.

This is not a proposal on a path forward for moderator compensation, but rather an overdue payment. Concurrently we are discussing committee formation in the community, and moderation is one of the subjects of that discussion.

Specification & Implementation:
Should this vote pass, it would result in the Across DAO sending a batch transaction (totaling 140k ACX) to these 3 contributors. In accordance with our current oSnap rules, this vote would be manually executed by the Across Council.

  • 60,000 ACX to okexwallet (Chinese community moderator) - address 0x0fb0d6fcb87ec73436f1ba270def3ee0b466ed32

  • 60,000 ACX to scarlet (Chinese community moderator) - address 0x634ed8C2dF8fBe613eE25DEBE1a460B4DF2487d7

  • 30,000 ACX to Smarty (community moderator) - address 0x20A29302D63B69cC4567c1B09037B97d27B3f663

Rationale:
10,000 ACX per month was chosen because it equates to $500 at an ACX price of $0.05. I believe this is a fair starting point for moderator compensation. It’s possible that this could expand in the future as moderator responsibilities expand.

Our Chinese moderators have been with us since before the token launched, but they both received airdrops commensurate with their contributions ahead of the launch. That is why I elected to use 6 months’ backpay for each of them.

Smarty has been an active moderator since March, which is why I’ve used 3 months for him.

I’ve chosen these individuals based on the consistency and quality of their moderation contributions. We have a very kind and generally scam-free community, so it has so far been acceptable for folks to moderate more on a volunteer basis. However, these three are always hustling and deserve more formal recognization. If there are others who should be on this list, I’m happy to hear the argument for that ahead of a snapshot vote.

Downside (Cons):
This proposal isn’t as granular as I’d like it to be and doesn’t capture 100% of the community moderator efforts we’ve seen in the past. However, compensation for these folks is well overdue, and I’m of the mindset here that this should be a one-time distribution followed by establishing a more concrete moderator role for the community.

Voting:
A “yes” vote results in the treasury distributing:

  • 60,000 ACX to okexwallet (Chinese community moderator) - address 0x0fb0d6fcb87ec73436f1ba270def3ee0b466ed32

  • 60,000 ACX to scarlet (Chinese community moderator) - address 0x634ed8C2dF8fBe613eE25DEBE1a460B4DF2487d7

  • 30,000 ACX to Smarty (community moderator) - address 0x20A29302D63B69cC4567c1B09037B97d27B3f663

A “no” vote results in no ACX being distributed.

3 Likes
2

These three notable folks did a lot of work, I’m in support of this with some sort of caveats we’d expect to put out:

  • this is an honorarium, a recognition for a job well done. It’s not a salary, not ongoing, and does NOT fully capture the immense value they brought.
  • We recognize that it’s not perfectly fair. Fairness is expensive, and it’s going to mis-pay those who receive, and it’s going to not-pay some who don’t.
  • This is a one-off thing to recognize these very influential early Across supporters, not any kind of precedent.

My last question Britt is, isn’t this something the committee budget is meant to be for? Or did that initiative sort of peter out?

2 Likes
3

Yeah good points. I tried to sort of capture that in the rationale and downsides section, because I definitely agree with those points.

To answer your question about the committees, it has recently regained some momentum and I hope to foster it more towards fruition in the coming weeks. I do believe this is something best handled by a committee rather than by Britt on an ongoing basis, for several reasons. But I was asked about this by our international mods, and it’s something that needed to get done. So I put together the best one-time effort that I could to accomplish the ask of compensation for past work done.

2 Likes
4

Totally agree with the above! All three have done an amazing job in the last months and need to be rewarded

1 Like