Request for Funding, @lehnberg: Jan-Mar 2020

@lehnberg Would you like to amend your funding request to be for 2000 GBP, which is still more than 2500 USD? See https://www.google.com/search?q=convert+2500+usd+to+gbp which currently reports you should request 1928 GBP for equivalent pay.

@lehnberg has done a huge amount for this community and should be entitled to ask what he wishes. However, I do see an issue – one person in one role for an extended period of time gives leverage to that person over the employer. Perhaps more roles should be established / the work-load split?

1 Like

Lol, I’ve asked about who is on the council/core, what their roles are, what they did to earn the position, what they’re doing to maintain the position and if the community can nominate David… The convo started elsewhere, but here’s the main thread https://gitter.im/grin_community/Lobby?at=5dce9d36e75b2d5a19d8ca91
The main TL;DR is every core/council member that replied had a different understanding of governance, core and council (FYI, core=council)… The only thing they agreed on from the start is they make these decisions in private and the community has no say.

So I decided to look last night, because @hashmap suggested David wasn’t core because he doesn’t contribute rust… Well @lehnberg doesn’t either, and David has 9 commits in fact. @jaspervdm only has 16 commits (4 to wallet), meanwhile @bladedoyle has 17 commits and made the only open source mining pool, but the core/council (and community) never respected blade enough and now we’re left with all closed source mining pools… One of which employs another council member… But I guess it’s ridiculous and I’m unreasonable to expect accountability of the core, who controls upwards of a million dollars and loves to virtue signal, sjw, fairness crap that they choose to say yet not backup with actions. They won’t do it but David and Blade deserve core status. Rather the core would prefer to pull a fast one and mislead the community about an unprecedented raise.

With all respect, but
@johndavies24 , what rights you have to ask this things ? Please answer , its a simple question
What rights you have ?

A community member? Seems like in an open community everyone has these rights?

If the answer is that nobody has the right except the anointed few Technomity new members then we should all stop pretending it’s a community and let the council give themselves whatever raises they want and continue making decisions that deflate the “community” excitement around the project

Is not enought. In my opinion if somebody only register in some forums, is not comunity member, only if contribute to comunity make this member of this comunity

1 Like

I’m rarely on this forum, it is not a place I frequent. You will find me elsewhere doing what I’m capable of doing. Are you suggesting only code contributors and donors have any right to share their opinions? I have every right to voice my opinion and will continue to do so, even if ideas generated outside of the council are met with apathy at best or animosity.

I’ll point out that my suggestion that security via obscurity by denying full sync is a mistake (despite @hashmap saying security by obscurity wasn’t the intention, igno clearly stated it was), and a few months later @lehnberg says he wishes we had more efforts on block explorers and linkability issues… But it was a horrible idea met with animosity a few months earlier… I also stated my concerns of nyms holding power over important things (an already realized concern) and was met with tons of animosity, only to have @lehnberg some 1 or 2 weeks later pointing out that the second domain is also owned by a nym and this is a problem… But it was outrageous when I said it.

1 Like

I think @johndavies24 is off-topic here.

and @lehnberg is well deserved .

2 Likes

As a community member @johndavies24 you contribute only annoying messages and trolling.

@johndavies24 Seems to forget that his first salary of 1500$ wasn’t determined by his value or by the ‘market’, as salaries often are, and instead was quite an arbitrary number which doesn’t mark his significance to Grin.

His raise is reasonable because 2500GBP is a reasonable price to pay for the work he is doing. The starting salary is irrelevant here.

I still believe this fund was not a good idea to begin with, but I do appreciate the way it’s being managed so far.

2 Likes

I wonder if David would even want to be on the council. My guess is no. #anarchy4life

1 Like

Thanks all. This turned out to be quite a thread. I’m disheartened by the request ending up being so contentious, but I’ve got mainly myself to blame for this. I wrote the initial funding request in a rush to get it out before the holiday break, wanting it to be short and high level. I did not imagine a scenario where readers would think I was being malicious, so I didn’t take that into account at all. In hindsight, I should have been clearer in my communication. Lesson learned. Still I hope most of you don’t think I was trying to deliberately sneak something past you: I wouldn’t have raised the request 3 weeks+ ahead of the meeting in that case. :wink:

If you want to, it’s probably quite easy to misconstrue most things I write. For example, there was exception taken to the phrase “according to Google”. I wrote it as I wanted to make clear which source I used. Google does mid-market exchange rates, which means that you wouldn’t necessarily get the same rate if you went to a proper currency exchange, and I didn’t want to get accused of deliberately providing misleading exchange rates. Such is the irony of it all, that a phrase I added in an attempt to prevent accusations, ended up being taken as a provocation. It all feels like a humbling experience to be honest, I’m learning to make fewer assumptions about how a reader interprets what I write. I’m hopeful this will lead to my writing improving over time.

@chronos, I wouldn’t want to amend the request down to GBP 2,000, I asked for GBP 2,500 explicitly, and I don’t think I’m over-reaching by doing so. It’s true that I’ve been gradually asking for more with each request, but I don’t see that as an issue. It’s a way of iterating, and (hopefully) improving confidence levels of the work I do and the value it carries. If Grin devs/community/council/whoever thinks I should get paid less than what I ask for, then it’s up to them to say so and take actions accordingly. I think my request is a good deal for Grin given the time and effort I’m putting in. After taxes, national insurance contributions, and factoring in living costs in London, it’s still not a great deal of money.

@colincr33vey I think there’s definitely an opportunity for more non-dev contributors to be supported for their work. Just as with development, there’s always a tonne of more work we could be doing. Anyone who’s making frequent and meaningful contributions on a regular basis should consider submitting a funding request. And anyone who wants to help but doesn’t know how / what’s needed, feel free to ask in the forums or on keybase.

@johndavies24 I agree with others that you’re being off-topic. But since you bring all these past events up, I want to make clear that I think you are way off in your summaries of what happened and the conclusions you draw from them. I don’t speak for others, but if you want me to listen more to your suggestions and ideas, try to be friendly, constructive, and don’t assume I’m being malicious. I’ll have an easier time understanding where you are coming from then.

@paouky the fund definitely ended up being a mixed blessing, it feels like we’re stuck with it for better or worse until someone comes up with a better solution.

1 Like

My initial complaint was the deceitful nature of the request. He provided additional replies in Keybase. I stated that he should either ask for 2000 GBP which fits what he was pretending to ask for (i.e. stabilizing the expected amount of GBP) or ask for another raise. I never suggested he shouldn’t get 2500 GBP. Rather than be reasonable he decided to continue to pretend he wasn’t being deceitful and edited his request twice only to remain deceitful. At this point the greater governance issues and their concern of the community became relevant. If you have the nerve to ask for a raise twice in a row in this manner I find it reasonable to take issue.

@lehnberg I will continue to work on my delivery. There was not a single moment where you believed 2500 GBP was the same amount you were previously getting. Maybe your initial post was not intentionally deceitful, but the interpretation was made clear to you. Please be cognizant of how your replies/edits (both here and keybase) contributed as well.

1 Like

Also, if it is true that more changed than just Igno leaving (i.e. you left another comfortable full-time role to focus more time on grin) and you intend on asking for more in the future, just ask for it now. I dont believe 30k GBP is a livable wage, and I am not against you getting what you deserve, especially as your responsibilities and time commitments change. Just ask for what you deserve in a straight forward manner. I personally believe the entire core (and others) deserve more and that there isnt much value in sitting on the funds when it can be used to reward those who deserve it and motivate new contributors to further the project. The only value I see to sit on it is the prospects that it will be worth much more if the market returns. When you guys build something to recon with, more will come. Maybe we could propose to break up the funds into known future expenses (audits, servers, domains, etc, not sure what the guaranteed future costs are), bounty funds, rainy day funds (and applied requests) and dev/core salaries. The first and fourth groups would be priority and the 2nd and 3rd would promote non-core involvement. Obviously, the first and fourth groups may need to pull from the 2nd and 3rd if new funds dont come in.

My issues are with the transparency, accountability, and community, not with your pay.

Hi @johndavies24

I don’t know whether it makes sense, neither for myself, or for Grin, for me to work full time on the project right now. What I do know, is that I feel comfortable with making this request for the horizon of Q1 2020. Beyond that, circumstances might change, both for the project and for myself.

Just ask for what you deserve in a straight forward manner.

Definitely take this feedback onboard, and will try to be clearer moving forward.

Maybe we could propose to break up the funds into known future expenses (audits, servers, domains, etc, not sure what the guaranteed future costs are), bounty funds, rainy day funds (and applied requests) and dev/core salaries. The first and fourth groups would be priority and the 2nd and 3rd would promote non-core involvement. Obviously, the first and fourth groups may need to pull from the 2nd and 3rd if new funds dont come in.

While I don’t want to derail the topic of this thread, if you feel like it, please write up a full circled proposal with as much details as you can think of about what exactly this would achieve, how it would work in practice, and why you think it is necessary. And then we can discuss the idea in a governance meeting. You may even want to consider submitting an RFC about it.

I guess I misinterpreted @Yeastplume when he suggested you transitioned into a full time role. So I guess the 67% raise you got last cycle accounted for the additional responsibilities from igno’s absence and you want an additional 30% on top of that. That means $18k/yr to $30k/yr to $39k/yr (in 3 mos) for a part time job with a single change in responsibilities when you went from $18k to $30k. I am not comfortable with your or yeast’s deceitful tactics. Deceiving on both amounts and merits.

Also, please refrain from referencing your locale or newborn child, both emotional and irrational facts, when discussing your value. Your cost of living and family matters are irrelevant here and bringing these up is inappropriate as well.

I’ve closed this topic for now while we discuss how to address this.