DAO Call - July 28, 2021
Summary Notes, Weekly DAO Call, July 28, 2021
Team in Attendance: Rochelle (apologies from Jesse)
Members in Attendance: @ce, Bree, DJSTRIKANOVA, howard k, splottingham
Roles: Call Moderator: Bree Recorder: Bree Proposal Tracker: splottingham
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
The first of three Medium posts written collaboratively by Jesse and Laurens regarding the SDK and upgrade will be posted tomorrow. This will serve as an update to the SDK.
PROPOSALS:
NEW REVISED POLL - Seeking equitable Weekly DAO Call Times https://dao.effect.network/proposals/68 Status: Pending (see proposal 66)
Incentivized program for liquidity on Pancake Swap https://dao.effect.network/proposals/67 Status: Processing Vote: Yes
DAO Governance Rewards 30% Unused vs Fixed https://dao.effect.network/proposals/64 Status: Processing Vote: No
It seems people would like to stay with the 30% distribution of leftover fees than go with a fixed amount.
A fixed amount would provide higher rewards more consistently than the 30%.
For example, with this current processing cycle there will be very little rewards given out to DAO members because there was a high amount of ask approved.
Conversely, a fixed amount could provide a distribution amount more akin to a full 30% each time, regardless of ask amounts.
While there are those of us who don’t understand why a fixed amount would not be preferred, others may feel that a fixed amount would cut into the reserves unnecessarily or perhaps do not understand fully what the proposal is suggesting.
Open Source Grant for work previously completed by DJSTRIKANOVA, set through multiple proposals P52-P63. It is important to read P52 carefully to understand the concept of what is being asked through the 12 proposals. https://dao.effect.network/proposals/52 Status: Processing
Vote: P52 Yes; P53 Yes; P53 Yes; P54 Yes; P55 Yes; P56 No; P57 No; P58 No; P59 No; P60 No; P61 No; P62 No; P63 No
DJSTRIKANOVA is satisfied that 5 of the grants passed.
He suggests that the next thing he works on will be to make a page to see how staking in the DAO vs. staking in the MasterChef contract to see how they compare.
Weekly DAO Call – Seeking equitable Weekly DAO Call Times https://dao.effect.network/proposals/66 Status: Processing Vote: Yes
There seems to be a problem with the Pollly Poll in that people may be able to change someone else’s vote.
46 yes votes vs. 19 identified poll participants vs. 23 poll results
As there is only about half of the yes votes represented in the poll, I’m adding another poll to replace this one through a proposal.
The Pollly Poll has been completed. Results:
6am – 3 votes
8am – 3 votes
3pm – 3 votes
5pm – 12 votes
8pm – 2 votes
DAO Call Recorder June ‘invoice’ request https://dao.effect.network/proposals/65 Status: Processing Vote: Yes
The hourly rate was set to $6.00. This seems to be an acceptable rate.
QUESTIONS/DISCUSSIONS FOR/WITH TEAM:
SDK:
A set of 3 Medium posts are planned, the first to be released tomorrow, this will provide updates for both the SDK and progress on the Effect Force update.
Post Script: The first of these posts is found here: https://medium.com/effect-ai/tech-blog-effect-account-system-a3bd8dfe93d4
There is a great deal of information here regarding the new accounting system for Effect Force.
If the community developers are able to use the SDK with ease it will be easier to promote and pitch Effect Network, as a software that can be used rather than promote a token.
Community developers will be among the first to give the team real feedback on the useability of the SDK.
DJSTRIKANOVA, splottingham, and hopefully others, will follow the SDK in detail to see how effectively the SDK is laid out and detailed.
A new Effect Force is due to be released mid-late November. This is likely when the SDK will be released.
This release plan would push the main Hackathon into next year if it is to be a good event.
A small pre-hackathon could be in December.
There remains concern about the swaps from NEO, especially regarding the team’s tokens.
The Team are currently actively getting their tokens swapped over from NEO into various EOS accounts.
Why was this not done previously, so that the only tokens not on EOS were late swappers? In other words, why are the team late swappers?
Or is the team swaps that are still continuing the active team tokens, or are they past team tokens?
Laurens is still getting data from the swaps. This is still on his radar, but he is waiting for the swap codes to be nearing exhaustion before tabulating.
Should we invite Laurens to attend a call to address remaining or new swap questions?
Some questions are:
When will the swaps stop?
Can the team show they have not sold any tokens?
NEO 3.0 is due to launch soon, how will this impact unswapped tokens?
Post Script: NEO 3.0 mainnet launched August 2nd https://twitter.com/Neo_Blockchain/status/1422165891601502209?s=20
The current market maker(s) do not seem to be efficient. Is there progress toward a more efficient market maker that will work to keep the price of EFX in line with increases as they occur?
This is not something Rochelle can address.
There are questions that the community keeps bringing up over and over relating to marketing, market maker, amount of tasks, and amount of requesters, the answers given in the AMA were not satisfactory to some. One thing that would bring closure to some of these concerns would be a token flow map from the Foundation (ICO forward). Has there been any discussion with the Foundation on this topic since the AMA? Are there any plans in place in this regard?
The team really has moved on from the AMA and are back in development mode.
Perhaps those who are doing their own research and are not getting satisfactory understandings of what they are seeing should contact the team directly.
The team is working on a Token Flow Map and Foundation resources.
People just need to have patience while the team develop these tools.
The token flow map is actively being constructed, but will take time to do.
Marketing:
How is Fabrizia doing?
She is still working and doing well.
She doesn’t post using her name, she posts using the Effect Network brand name.
There will be an increase in influencer marking coming soon.
There will be an increase of Medium posts upcoming from different team members.
Effect Force worker meetings are currently only for KH translators. There is a great amount of translation tasks going on and so the Friday worker meetings have been restricted to KH workers for the time being.
There are influencer socials tasks atm, and there are more NFT tasks to be released soon.
LIQUIDITY INCENTIVIZATION/VOLUME:
Updates: Any updates on the progress of the MasterChef contract?
Post Script: Discord post by Jesse on July 31.
Vigor:
Community member Lennie is really involved in Vigor and will look into what needs to happen with EFX for it to be listed with Vigor.
I have not yet heard back from Lennie.
HACK-A-THON:
Is there any progress on acquiring the account with Devpost?
So far we are planning for three months.
The Foundation is willing to pay for Devpost at $1500/month.
We want the Hackathon to be as good as it can be, so we don’t really want to be having it asap, we want to have it when the SDK is as complete as it could be for ease of use for developers. So this may mean that the Hackathon doesn’t happen until the new year.
The team are looking into the schedules for when the best time for the Hack-a-Thon would be.
Rochelle was working with a teammate to track down all the Hackathons that will be running over November – February.
They are trying to figure out what will all be going on during that time.
Hackathon call to be this Friday, July 30.
Post Script: A summary of that call written by DJSTRIKANOVA, posted in Discord.
OPEN DISCUSSION:
Last week we discussed the idea of automatically unregistering accounts due to zero balances and inactivity, prompted some thoughts.
Would some of those people who have zero balances not have elected to click on the ‘Leave DAO’ button so that they would still be registered to collect on some of the network fees that need to be manually processed?
Possibly.
This backpay distribution could be quite complicated. This is a good guess
In theory the network fee distribution should be based upon their votes. So there will need to be some kind of backwards compatible distribution model.
This could be quite complex to achieve, and perhaps the amount to be distributed won’t be enough to warrant the complex work.
If it is just distributed based upon a onetime snapshot at distribution time, then this would mean that someone who has only been voting a few cycles would end up receiving a disproportionately high amount compared some someone at about the same during the snapshot, but who had been voting in all cycles during the time frame the funds are coming from.
It makes sense to leave people registered to be able to see their vote record, also if they decide to return after an absence their history will remain.
DJSTRIKANOVA will put some effort into creating a filter system for the DAO members section.
Basic filters for most/least active, most/least vote weight, etc
The amount of proposals does seem to impact the amount of votes placed.
Too many proposals does reduce the amount of votes place
The last cycle vote weight was 4M with one proposal
The current cycle with 16 proposals the total vote weight is 3.48M vote weight per proposal.
The consecutive grant votes reduced with the latter proposals.
There seemed to be a cost to having too many proposals.
We still have not had a cycle with no proposals.
If there were no proposals at all would there be any reward at all given out?
There is no vote to be able to do. Therefore, there is no participation at all.
Would there be carry over (in regard to the 30% leftover cycle budget distribution and network fees) or would there be zero rewards from that cycle?
What would happen is that the 30% of the entire cycle budget would be distributed to the fee pool for the following distribution.
Network Fees in the fee pool would accumulate making the next distribution based upon a higher amount.
Rochelle is concerned about the amount of ask required for the DAO store, after listening to community comments and seeing the vote results for developer asks. She is considering making some adjustments to her store design concepts. One of these ideas are:
Have the DAO sell NFTs created on the platform on Opensea.
When the NFT sells, ½ the sale goes to the DAO (into the fee pool), the other ½ goes to the workers who contributed to the NFT.
Those NFTs would require some marketing to promote people purchasing the NFT.
This would make use of the tech for Effect Pieces.
This could start as a trial and be scaled up.
The DAO could vote on which NFT they’d like to promote
This would start as a black and white drawing, like a colouring book that gets coloured in by the worker.
The workers could see the whole black and white image, they could see the whole image but only have access to one square.
The DAO would need to fund the workers creating the work, and fund the ETH fees for minting on Opensea.
Step one would be to create the images on Effect Force, then the DAO can vote for the images that they’d like to have turned into NFTs.
Step two would be to take the approved images and mint them into an NFT under the EffectDAO artist store in Opensea.
There are other options than Opensea to consider. It will be important to consider the platform used for creating the NFT and selling it on. There are many different platform all with different traits. Some will be less pricey but will be more challenging to make a sale on.
What about the IP rights (copy rights) of the original images used? Where would the original image come from?
The original line drawings will come from sources that do not have copy right attached.
The base line image to be used would be curated and sourced and then the DAO would select.
Once the final image has been created, the end result would belong to the DAO, to belong to the requester account which would be the DAO.
If this was set up where the image desired to be used was uploaded and then the EFX for the workers was approved every cycle or in batches.
This could make use of the file upload feature on the proposals 😊.
Has there been an approach to the Foundation regarding possible funding for the DAO merchandise store?
Rochelle has had talks and has had meetings, but it seems the best thing is to narrow the scope and chunk out what is required.
Time commitment also needs to be considered. She is considering what level of commitment she is prepared to invest into the store.
Her role with Effect Network is expanding in the next 12 months and she is not certain how much would be left to manage and run a store.
In terms of dollars, how much do you think you will need in one year?
Looking at about $16k for the first 3 months, then half again for the next 3 months.
The first 3 months would be the most labour intensive.
It would be about $24K for the whole year.
A suggestion was given to lay it out in a plan for a sentiment approval proposal to see if the DAO would approve.
She is also considering doing this as a private business that runs on the network instead of going through the DAO.
The main telegram is still in need of more admin engagement. (This is a nudge to keep the pressure up for a second admin)
There are not enough positive comments and personal engagement with the community from admin.
Negative comments are important and have their place, but there needs to be balance with positive comments and positive engagement from the admins.
Even Jehudah is quiet lately and not contributing to conversations. Scantily answering direct questions is not promoting conversation. He needs a partner to bounce off.
Having the Hackathon will help with engaging conversations, but this will not be supported without good admin.
There needs to be an admin supported return to conversation, to be able to just get to know the personalities on the chat.
Chris popping in every blue moon to give an exaggerated enthusiasm is not working, this is not what is needed.
Countering critique and solving problems without any balance of positive engagement is not conducive to building a community.
Promoting ‘fun’ through random quizzes and prompts won’t work if there isn’t first a positive conversational environment.
Actual tasks on the platform would go a long way to increase engagement on the platform.
We seem to get away from that. But it really is just about requesters and tasks and workers.
But there are no tasks, there are no workers, there is no community.
Rochelle is very busy with the tasks and there is much more that she knows could be done, but it is finding time for her to do them. There is a bottleneck here without more businesses expanding the use of the network.
The SDK is one big part about expanding the scale and scope of adding requesters to the platform.
There is a limit to what Jesse and Laurens can do.
Their limit is not sufficient for the task demand.
It maybe would have been nice to have had the SDK in place a year ago, but Jesse and Laurens have learned a lot and this will be reflected in the SDK they are building now.
Their experience building the BV apps will hopefully contribute to an excellent SDK.
Marketing the SDK and Effect Network by the DAO
The marketing should come once the SDK is out (after the SDK has run through the practice hackathon)
The DAO has shown that they don’t want to pay the people high amounts for building stuff for them.
Perhaps the DAO will be happier to pay for advertising to get the SDK out there, to get Effect Network out there to potential business who would build on TEN.
Advertising is the next stage.
The hackathon will be a form of advertising in and of itself.
Maybe the hackathon could be advertised on job posting sites or something.
There is the BV and there is Effect Network. They do not need to be tied together once the SDK is determined complete and independent. After this point they can be separate entities. (after the HG is restructured, and voted in by election, the move might be to have the HG take on a treasurer role.
We can say we are a decentralized entity and if we want to get this out to people, we need to market.
The DAO should not be marketing the BVs services. Once the SDK is complete the DAO should market Effect Network to potential developers and businesses who would become independent requesters on the platform with their own needs and own marketing for their products and worker needs.
These requesters/developers will pay the 10% network fee for using the network.
At the moment 100% of that would go into the fee pool, but at some point a portion of that could be voted into building up the treasury.
New requesters/developers of the network is twofold.
They build something
They gain knowledge of the software they are using.
Then they share that knowledge with others and promote the use of the software to others
And once enough people use it, this creates a standard of what is recommended for use. So it markets itself.
There is a lot of work to go before getting to that point.
This needs to be done in steps.
The SDK needs to come first and it needs to be tested.
Once the SDK is ready then we, the DAO, need to advertise.
The Foundation can also help with this.
There are many improvements coming to the backend of the work force with the upcoming updates to the Force accompanying the SDK that will fix current problems.
There will be improvements to what a requester will be able to work with in the background of the Force.
This will allow the requester to greater tailor the Force to what they need.
There should be improvements to approval ratings and how these are achieved.
There should be improvements to how workers see their work approved or rejected.
There should be a tax accounting system for workers.
There will be BSC incorporated into the Force.
If the BV were to market now prior to these updates they’d really be marketing to a bottleneck operation that wouldn’t fully support a great influx of requesters and workers.
Even for the BV the upcoming updates to The Force and the SDK are highly important.
After these updates a big marketing push will be more appropriate.
With the big push on all the tech right now, and not focusing on marketing to new requesters until after the SDK and Force updates, what is Chris focusing on during his day?
He is overseeing/managing and following along with the tech stuff, he is also working hard with the marketing team to tie this all together to be ready with a big marketing push once the SDK and update are out.
Why are we not seeing the marketing yet? Visible marketing.
We are not seeing marketing in force because there isn’t much point in marketing a bottleneck system. When this is fixed with the next update and supported by the SDK marketing can happen in force.
There is a big plan once the SDK is out. So not only is the BV going to market the Network for their own use, but the Foundation is also going to support marketing to expand Effect Network.
There are things that could be done now to make Effect Network more visible. This might not be a priority for the team, but there could be some promotion of the token. Increases in the token price could remain, and not drop the next day. It’s really hard to ask people to wait until all is ready.
The team are taking time from their work on the tech to write-up blogs to help keep people informed.
There are somethings that could be done in the meantime to be more visible, or at least appear to be seen to the crypto community.
We understand that in the big picture the crypto community is not the main audience we need for marketing, but we should still be visible within the crypto community.
They can be fickle, so with the SDK we should be expanding beyond the crypto community.
Yes, but with the price so low it is a good time to promote for new people getting in on the token.
And working to keep the price level is important, if it goes up it should stay up – at least for a while, even if artificially.
The price will go up with more requesters.
With the MasterChef contract, there will be more use of the token.
There will need to be more visibility, or who will be using the MC contract?
We really need more Tweets, engagement in Telegram. We need to be seen more even if in the big picture it’s not that crucial, it’s important now for community sentiment.
OLD DISCUSSIONS (tabled)
Alternating times for DAO Calls to allow for greater participation.
Proposal in place.
Discuss further with team about incorporating worker pay in perpetuity of trained algorithms.
Reporting of sub-groups to the weekly calls, or to GitBook.
Suggestions:
Define exactly what the HG’s role is,
this should be visible on the blockchain and on the dashboard, in the smart contract
Elect new members
Make use of GitBook
Has there been any updates to this that can be shared?
Potential Proposals:
How to become a guardian guide
Using Effect Captions to update community made guide videos. Especially videos with lasting relevance. Could be used to promote Effect Captions.
Would need to include the quoted price points in the proposal
What languages would be prudent to put into the closed captions
English only would be about $20
Developer costs for dashboard improvements
The community developer group
There will likely be a proposal mapped out with multiple phases.
Before the proposal is put forth they need to decide how to arrange for taxes and other dynamics related to payments
Proposal for opensource the product
Timeline
Proposals to the Foundation:
DAO Store start-up expenses
Hack-a-thon expenses
Tasks:
Listen to July 14th audio regarding future Foundation management
Vigor inquiry
Time zone proposal
Dashboard updates:
Reward calculator (P30)
Timeline
Token Flow Map
Worker of the Week into DAO dashboard (P29)
Filter system
Ambassador TEAM google Drive
Discuss decentralized options or to create an interface to access IFPS storage
GitBook:
Guide on how to become a guardian
Last updated
Was this helpful?