You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Would DAO/SPS proposals based on an "Advance" funding model be supported?
In principle, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to this, but there's a big challenge with trust. The person making the proposal and the nature of the proposal would matter a a lot.
Maybe it would be more palatable, especially to larger accounts, if structured with milestones so the developer gets a certain amount up-front and then additional advances are only paid after promised deliveries are met.
The idea is to be less of a trust-challenge than the existing status quo. My perception is that the current barrier is so high that there is no flow in the economy. It seems to me that @the-gorilla is one of the more active and well-connected people in the community and it was still a significant lift for his proposal to get approved. I figure that someone like me would have zero shot in the current system.
Since the DAO can be used for any project I think we should be careful to not get too locked in on the idea that it's only for developers.
This is kind of how the proposal system already works -- it's paid out on a regular interval, but the big lift is getting it approved and then proposal voters mostly seem to have a set-it-and-forget-it attitude. In my mind the "lump sum" wasn't the key element of what I was suggesting, it's that the payment creates a floor to shield the creator from the unpredictability of the "per product" rewards.