Looks like the OSL has reduced their costs and are now offering support at less then half of the cost of this proposal
Kudos to Luis and thr interbloc team for introducing a competing proposal and helping to lower costs for Osmosis. Competition gud.
1 Like
Thanks Robo, the proposal is higher actually at $147,000, but OSL is acting like the $95,000 they didn’t spend last period is theirs already.
Furthermore the structural deficiencies that got us here in the first place remain, I still see no mechanism for accountability and the insistence of it is what made us put this up. I will share my thoughts there as well, independent of this proposal.
2 Likes
This I don’t see tbh. They have included the complete spend for the 6 months and substracted the current holdings to come to the requested amount. But they don’t pretend like the total costs are capped at the spend request imo.
I see 2 proposals;
- 1 from Interbloc for $143k for 6 months (including the buffer)
- 1 from the OSL for $162k for 6 months (including the contigency fund)
So the gap is not so enormous anymore with the current proposals at “merely” $19k difference.
1 Like
We had a great twitter space today where both the Interbloc and OSL teams discussed their respective proposals. You can watch the recording here if you missed it:
Apologies for my repeated connection issues and of course my obviously unorganized notes I prepared (badly) for the host-led question period…
To follow up, here are some key poiints I wanted to get across (in no particular order):
I may be beating a dead horse on this one now, but I need to reiterate that we do have set shifts for our team members, and they are posted up on a schedule that is the same week after week. Sometimes people need to make changes to this, and they coordinate this with another person who can cover that shift as well as the accountant or someone else involved with the multisig process (this will be much simpler with the transition back to some assigned management/administrative roles). The move from a set salary to an hourly wage for these duties will further bolster the personal responsibility each of us has to remain engaged and honor our commitments in this way.
I want to mention I am a bit confused by the statements about a lack of transparency on our side, as there is virtually no information we are not willing to share upon request.
I won’t pretend we are great at actively putting out a lot of information like this, but please don’t mistake that for intentional omission of any kind. A part of me thinks that it has just never really occurred to us to proactively put this information or ‘reports’ out because typically it is not something many people request, if ever, so we don’t spend the manpower on it. This should not be reason to suspect our group or its members are unaccountable or failing to deliver on our commitments.
As a corrective action to this, we are working on fully automated tracking, recording and assembly of some KPI’s (like what you can see in the graph on our prop discussion, and anything else we can grab) into an easily digestible and regularly released document.
To add to this, we began tracking these internal metrics quite a while ago, which I believe were referenced in some statements in our previous proposal.
We also considered moving to Mava, for the same reasons Luis mentioned, but decided it was simpler in the end to create our own bespoke tooling for the monitoring/reporting of support tickets and related metrics, using our existing platform.
On my end personally, I will be pushing for us to host regular “town hall” style events, maybe every 4-6 weeks, to help us stay ontop of these perceved issues or gaps in information. Even if the content of these meetings may be dry or seem like wasted time/effort, I think it may be beneficial for all parties if that platform for addressing these things were made available as a regular thing.
The inefficiency of the “pseudo-DAO” structure of the group is not something I will argue against, and for this reason implementing some style of effective and designated management structure is something we have been working on, and which will be in place for the approaching operating period.
Finally, I want to touch on the concerns about the seemingly constant “changes” from proposal to proposal. The changes over the past 3 or so funding rounds have indeed been very significant, but the reasons for those changes have always been from the angle of being more efficient and more effective in what we do, how we do it, and the amount of funding required for it.
I think we have always been forthcoming and genuine with our intentions in this way, and I believe our actions reflect this.
To summarize, I guess none of this is really concerning information, game-changing news or shocking discovery, which does not make this an “easy” decision. I could not in good conscience imply it would be a mistake placing them in this role, which is testament to our shared values, and reason for the two groups often collaborating.
At the end of the day, I feel like this is a choice of whether or not to make a sideways move that may very well neither improve nor degrade the overall quality of this community, or the support systems availble within.
1 Like
I like this idea a lot, but if I may build off of it a little and suggest that such events have a COMPSTAT-Performance Based Budgeting element on the agenda to improve performance and accountability.
Having such meetings regularly scheduled, such as the first Friday of every month, with an agenda and supporting material published at least 2 week days in advance so that those that can’t attend have the opportunity to submit comments and questions, and minutes published within 5 week days after the event would be very nice too.
1 Like
I didn’t have an opportunity to stay till the end of the Twitter space where it was opened up for questions from the community as such I would like to ask the following questions:
A) There is approximately 3,500 USDC in the ProtoRev account, why shouldn’t the community appropriate a portion of these funds to cover certain non-personnel costs that are or can be acquired on a subscription basis?
Using the OSL bid for example, why should costs like the chat software ($1,430-3,221 OSMO), bots ($520-1171 OSMO), and servers for relaying ($975-2194 OSMO) be covered in OSMO (at $0.444 per OSMO) rather than USDC (1=$1)?
B) ProtoRev also holds approximately 2,840 ATOM, and the Community Pool holds AXL, STARS, AKT, SCRT, and UMEE. Why shouldn’t a portion of these resources be staked (e.g. 25% of each) with validators on those chains that also operate an Osmosis validator and run relayers from these chains to Osmosis, and a portion of those staking rewards shared with them (e.g. 50%) if they meet performance standards so that funding for relayers can be used to operate relayers to other smaller and newer chains?
C) Unless I have missed it, why don’t either of your bids include support for this site?
I think the overall consensus from the previous proposal around the ProtoRev revenue was that sending the non-OSMO to the CP was approved, but the proposal failed on the OSMO-part. 
I’ll try to listen back to the recording (when my works stops killing me ^^ ), but did it also discuss how to bring the proposals on chain? Especially since we have effective 2-2,5 weeks before the current funding period runs out?
1 Like
A) Good question. I will make sure to bring up the idea of asking for non-osmo tokens (especially stables) for any future funding.
B) I’d never even considered doing anything like that with community pool tokens from other chains, but you should 1000% put some ideas for how these can be used in a new thread somewhere… very interesting.
C) I don’t think I mentioned any of the work I/we did to set up this site because it wasn’t really an OSL thing.
Sunny asked in a shared working group chat about migrating platforms, (to Discourse specifically) so a handful of members from the Osmosis foundation, the dev team and OSL volunteered.
The foundation is covering the associated hosting costs, but all the work in building and maintaining it is sort of a community effort.
Sorry for the super late response lol, also I’m just locking this thread but if you want to follow up please continue in the revised discussion thread which is linked at the very top of this one.
1 Like