RE: Do we actually need a worker proposal system? Let's get some real examples of work proposals first.
Maybe only receive funding when there is work to be done - like the addition of claiming/creating accounts after the latest fork?
What would the proposal be? What would it look like?
I think this could be answered by BT, or someone with knowledge of the BitShare's network where WPs have been in place for a while.
And at some point the project is finished and then what? What happens when the funding stops?
I guess, no more new features until there is a good enough proposal/set of features to add that are voted in to receive funding.
Also if he is secured of funds for X amount of time will he work harder or slower to make it a sustainable business.
Businesses hate paying for 'keeping the lights on', yet these tasks are critical in places :) I would suggest for a website, that isn't critical to the chain (but is a solid nice to have), that this wouldn't be a valid 'paid for x amount of time' deal, and more a 'this is what I want to add' sort of thing.
Maybe steemcleaners is a better example of constant funding for a no end in sight project? They take a good deal of Author rewards to fund, which to some might look better coming from a WP pool. e.g. Is the 1.5 million delegation that amount to ensure they have enough to combat abuse, or enough to ensure they can pay themselves enough, or both? With WP, there could be a line drawn - SP for abuse, WP funding for work?
Tough questions man, I'm feeling the heat :)
I don't get it.
First you say:
And then you say:
To me, he seems to be doing all the work that needs to be done now without a worker proposal funding and even better he secured his own funding by finding users that want to support him.
Even better would be a revenue model outside of the reward pool which should be the aim of most apps imho.
Wether Steem cleaners take money directly from the author rewards or we first cut the author pool altogether and then put it into a WPS pool and then give it to them.
I don't see the difference.
Maybe my thinking changed as I was working through my example :)
I think WP work is paid hourly, with a known lump sum split across this time and so there would be a fixed end point to the received funds. If this is true (would need to listen to BT recording again) then it would be a case of offering up the list of features (work to be done) prior to receiving funding.
Yes I agree, but love doesn't buy food
This is the goal for sure. So should WP's be seen as 'kickstarter' funds?
Right now they have one pot, the delegation. Some is used to curb abuse, some is used to self-vote - they decide. What if there was no abuse for a week, would you be happy with all the SP going to 'salary'?
With WP, the salary is separated from the SP allocated for abuse. This sounds more transparent and fair to me.
Just thinking out loud, I don't have the answers :)