We understand the importance of keeping the Evmos Community informed and up-to-date - this FAQ page will be regularly reviewed and updated as new questions and concerns arise. Please do not hesitate to reach out for further clarifications and/or concerns on Commonwealth, Discord, or Telegram.
Q1: Are any DAO2DAO swaps already confirmed?
⚠ Note (added Jan 31st): This question is no longer relevant to this proposal as we have decided to move diversification into its own separate proposal. The question and answer is being left because it may be relevant to know for the future.
We've already begun discussions with ShapeShift DAO and even temperature checked with the community (positive sentiment). Discussions kind of halted when our funding prop v1 was struck down, but I still talk to many of them daily and they are very willing to move forward with a potentially creative DAO2DAO swap that is beneficial long term for both parties.
We are also in talks with Hedgey, in the process of scheduling a meeting with Arbor Financial (example stablecoin raise), and we are also very keen on working with PrimeDAO. There dozens of other DAOs we can potentially begin discussions with, but will be waiting until for the time being.
Realistically, for the first month we will likely sell a small amount of tokens (just enough to meet the compensation requirements for that month).
Q2: What is the timeline for the remaining ECPs to follow?
ECP-2B will be our next target proposal, which is to formalize and fund the Community Moderation and Support team. The R&D / bounty fund will most likely follow in a few weeks on Commonwealth so that we can begin the formal drafting of ECP-3 with Community input and engineers that have worked on similar protocols.
Q3: How are contributor compensation determined? Who assigns the pay paramaters such as VL?
The long form version can be found in the Standardized Compensation Framework that was passed and ratified in Proposal 83.
In shorter and simpler terms, while the Standardized Compensation Framework gives a good starting point in determining pay, the parameters set in ECP-1 should have consensus with the proposing members of every subDAO. This obviously does not mean that the pay will be granted and approved by the community when it is time to vote.
Our goal is to scale the Evmos DAO by attracting and retaining great contributors and leaders. However, as the DAO is still experimenting as a relatively new player in the space, the Compensation Framework is likely to be amended or even completely overhauled in the future through a governance proposal.
Q4: Shouldn't the vesting contracts be denominated in Evmos and not USD to better align long term commitment with contributors?
In an effort to keep the vesting plan straightforward, ECP-1 was designed with the base salary and contribution time as the main determining factors of vesting contracts. It is important to note that while basing the vesting solely on the current market price of EVMOS may seem attractive, it could prove detrimental in the long-term. Instead, the vesting of EVMOS is readjusted every 6 months to reflect changes in salary, time spent contributing for Evmos DAO and the Community, and the market price of EVMOS, thus aligning all members with the long-term success of the organization. This approach may deviate from traditional stock options for startups and traditional companies, however, we believe that pegging to the base salary in USD is the most appropriate option in our special case. While we are open to alternative suggestions that would fairly apply to all members, including potential sub-DAOs in the future, this would require an amendment of ECP-1.
Q5: What happens if the DAO fails to obtain stablecoins?"
⚠ Note (added Jan 31st): This question is no longer relevant to this proposal as we have decided to move diversification into its own separate proposal. The question and answer is being left because it may be relevant to know for the future.
In extreme scenarios where obtaining stablecoins becomes challenging, we can utilize protocols such as Hedgey to facilitate partial payments in EVMOS. Additionally, we can also consider selling in-house treasury bonds, where EVMOS is sold at a discounted rate but is locked for a period of time through a simple contract. However, we are optimistic that this will not be a major issue as we expect any such sales to have minimal impact on the price of EVMOS. Furthermore, this highlights the benefit of community-owned liquidity. By having a significant position in a stablecoin pool, the treasury can generate revenue from swap fees, which can be used to support contributor salaries and build long-term total value locked (TVL) in the process.