There is a need for a low overhead way to reimburse SaaS expenses. We don’t want to require a proposal and funding cycle for each need, considering these are typically under $200 each.
Navnaut is responsible for the DAO Tooling domain, and should guide the creation and management of this process.
Navnaut Pod will receive from Sonar Labs a quarterly budget allocation for SaaS products of $500 (per quarter), to be distributed by pods according to the request process detailed below.
Process for reimbursements under $200
- Requests for reimbursements will be decided monthly as part of the existing monthly distributions.
- Pods should consult with Nav-naut about the tooling need prior to making a purchase, because Nav-naut is testing and integrating tools for our ecosystem. Nav-naut, as an active custodian of community funds, may deny the request, or advise the use of a different tool to match our current recommendations or roadmap.
- If Nav-naut will not approve the funding request, the request can be escalated to Source Pod, the ultimate custodian of the software budget.
- Pods can request reimbursement on behalf of an individual from Nav-naut Pod by posting the request in the forum and tagging Nav-naut
- Funds will be sent directly from Nav-naut to the wallet being reimbursed.
- The brief request must include the amount (in ETH or USD), description of purchase, discord handle of person, and ETH wallet address to be reimbursed.
- Optional/recommended that the requester add the request to the Nav-naut pod agenda, so it will be seen.
- The Nav-naut pod will create, sign, and execute the transaction as soon as reasonably possible, within 7 days of the first pod meeting of the month.
Process for reimbursements over $200
- Pods ask for reimbursement as part of their quarterly funding request
This process should improve the flow of reimbursements for small expenses without requiring the usual Resource Allocation proposal funding process from Source Pod for each request.
The 2 questions I have while crafting this:
- Does Navnaut hold the funds or Source Pod?
- How much should the budget be? I think we have requests pending for about $500 (yearly), but update me if I am wrong on that.
Navnaut holds the funds since they own the domain for tooling. Budget size is ultimately a Source Pod decision for now since they would be funding this, but $500/yr seems reasonable.
That was actually $500 per quarter, based on SL already planning on spending $1200 a year for just Discourse, and we need other things, too.
However, if Nav-naut is managing the funds vs simply distributing them, there would be an effort to minimize the use of those funds.
Some decisions about how they get spent was the start of my awareness around a lack of values alignment in the community. Then other issues came up that made it clear that that is a conversation we need to explicitly have and document, so that we are all more or less in alignment.
There can be some incoherence, and then there is simply misalignment. Mission/Vision take care of the what, but Values speaks to the how.
I see Jon made this yearly above. When he and I were speaking about it last night in Nav-naut we were speaking about quarterly, so now I am simply confused.
I can say with certainty that $500 / year would not meet our needs even if we start running our own server. That alone would be close to $200 and yearly Autocode at the level we want is $180 / yr.
What I was referring to was the $500 in requests that have already been made for the year.
In the proposal I state $500 quarterly budget. So $2000 per year.
Sorry for the confusion
Not an issue I brought up today @JonSimmons-dendrons, but I did bring it up last week. I think it just got lost in the dispute between Post and I.
I don’t want to be reimbursing people at random times, as fits their convenience. If the amounts are small, they can wait, or plan. I suggested than that we have a set time of the month, mid-month maybe, or even less frequently like the end of the first month, and the end of the 2nd month of a quarter as when we would do disbursements of these funds.
Ostensibly, the amounts are small enough and/or the need small enough that someone can wait for the refund, or wait to start working with a product. I made it clear then, that I really don’t want be doing these disbursements more than once per month. Tx wise, since these are smaller amounts, it makes sense to want to batch porcess them as much as possible, which is actually a good argument for only once per quarter, maybe in the middle of the quarter.
I know this was not spoken about today, but the process for disbursements I am reading now was not a part of the original proposal either, and I really don’t want to do these disbursements ad hoc.
John, I know I agreed to this as is. I do think that these funds could be disbursed 3 times per month along witth the regular Nav-naut disbursements without causing excess tx costs.
A little late, but it came up for me today, so I am sharing.
No objections on my part. I also think we can continue to evolve on this as we experiment.
I consent to this budget proposal.
Pupil delegated consent to Cadena here: Discord
Other source pod members consented on the Friday call: https://app.clickup.com/36144881/v/dc/12f1qh-1165/12f1qh-11167
So I think we’re awaiting response from @Gaian
Unless @aia you feel strongly enough about
I do think that these funds could be disbursed 3 times per month along witth the regular Nav-naut disbursements without causing excess tx costs.
to amend the proposal to explicitly include this.
I don’t want to block the proposal. I just think that detail of implementation should be changed.
The best way to handle it might to modify that part, and ask if anyone objects to the change.
We could then confirm it on Friday.
Further Details Not in the Proposal
Will we be getting funds for Q3?
If so, when?
Ideally that disbursement could happen today, although I think Nav-naut can delay it’s disbursement for up to a week no problem. So, that if we did Q3, some of the Nav-naut SAAS/VPS expenditures could be reimbursed simultaneously. @JonSimmons-dendrons Your thoughts on this?
I’m good with that. We’ll add it as a rider at the next meeting