Gov-Naut Compensation Convo 2022.04.26 High Level Summary & Next Steps Temp Check

Reminder: this applies only to gov-naut, and only for X1. We are on purpose avoiding making it “what it should be” in the long term, in order to move forward now. It is very likely this will evolve and change significantly over time, and that we may have discussions or tensions that will come up during X1 that we will want to discuss.

So long as we focus on maintaining the culture of a safe space for open communication in gov-naut, then the risks associated with moving very fast and sticking closely to “good enough for now, safe enough to try” are low, and the clear benefit is making significant progress.

Key takeaways from gov-naut compensation meeting:

  • strategic:
    • rewarding proposals & actions that help us make progress
    • rewarding actions that build internal and external
    • rewards for quality work in alignment with expectations when agreed upon
  • tactical
    • partially role-based, in order to avoid atomization of everything
    • ongoing process (tbd) to update role compensation
  • Additionally, reading between the lines from our conversation it seems likely that we’re also aligned that:
    • gov-naut funds are exclusively for compensating gov-naut members, or hiring other pods for tasks as a part of X1 initiatives (and the other pods can choose how to compensate people) unless we as a pod decide to make an exception


  • More detailed notes fromthe meeting will be available soon (thanks @zkchun & @appt_pupil)
  • The above is very rough wording, please comment to refine it!

Regarding next steps:

  • thanks to @zkchun for the 2 articles posted in discord, (API and coordinape)

    • My sense if that the API framework is good to have in our heads (Perception of: Allocation, Process, Interaction), and that coordinape is useful once we have a slightly larger group (potentially X2).
  • Proposal:

    • There are several reasonably small tasks for people to take on, in order to gather the minimum info required info to make a practical decision on X1 gov-naut compensation. Tasks will be compensated, but compensation would have to be determined according to the framework we decide upon soon.
    • Then we come back together and I would facilitate part 2 of the compensation conversation, finishing off the tactical and doing the practical section of the same framework.
    • The 3 tasks would be:
      • Create a high level approximation of the “legacy” work that has been done for gov-naut activities, ie pre-X1 (propose to limit this to easily verifiable outputs, ie proposals, etc)
      • Create a high level approximation of the X1 related work across all 3 initiatives & any other current work (ie potentially X1), whether completed for still to be done. This includes for example temp-checks for paused initiatives, since that work was done in good faith according to conditions at the time.
      • Create a high level list of the duties for gov-naut X1 roles (project leads, pod lead, etc)
1 Like

Thanks everyone for a great (& quick!) discussion of this during the gov-naut sync today. Next steps agreed upon:

The 3 tasks above will be completed by:

  1. @appt_pupil, verified by @zkchun: legacy work
  2. @Appt_Pupil, with @Cadena & @zkchun: X1 related work
  3. @Cadena & @aia: X1 roles & duties

If anyone not present at today’s @gov-naut sync meeting would like to participate in the above activities, please contact the people already tagged above directly to offer your support.

Tasks are due no later than the @gov-naut sync meeting on May 12th.

I will proceed to schedule our next compensation conversation (as detailed in the post above) for the week starting Monday May 16th, that way there will be time between having the info available from the above tasks, and the comp conversation, so that anyone interested can review.

Thanks everyone!


Hi all, documenting here that we had our follow-up compensation call on May 27th as planned.

Full notes will be shared separately.

Documenting here that the following tasks were agreed upon, all due at the @gov-naut sync on June 8th:

1 Like

As discussed today in the @gov-naut weekly sync:

Next step is to post a temp-check proposal in discourse for the actual number of points to be assigned to each compensated role and task for the following 3 time periods:

Said proposal will of course be discussed and potentially modified, adjusting points values for roles and tasks, but will be enough to actually calculate the value in ETH of a “point”.

@aia, @Appt_Pupil , and @Gaian will collaborate on this, building on the work @aia & @Cadena already did here: ClickUp

They agreed to post the temp check to discourse latest Monday, June 27th end of day.

We encourage all @gov-naut members (and actually all interested @orcanauts) to respond to the temp check ahead of the the Wed June 29th gov-naut sync with objections, comments, and/or consent.

Getting close, thanks everyone!

Note from meeting on 06-15–
Appt Pupil wanted to make sure that the people that who were involved pre X-1 get a sense of recognition through being compensated. He designed the compensation to be broad, rather than deep, so to speak.

I’m curious how everyone feels about this, and if we want the pre-X-1 compensation to be broad rather than deep.

I could go either way, I raise the subject because I thought it would be useful to make as a conscious choice.

Just want to bubble this back up and make a brief statement on why I prefer a broader versus deeper structure.

Ultimately, at this stage it is more important to make sure that those that have contributed to the ecosystem (even if small and/or brief) receive some recognition for that, rather than trying to maximize recognition for a few that may have been more involved. Frankly, there’s no way that our current resource pool can provide anything close to a market rate of compensation for participants, so trying to make this deeper doesn’t really address that and we would do so at the expense of some folks not getting any recognition at all. That trade-off just isn’t worth it.


That makes sense.