This is why I suggested a 3 month realignment. That's there in the grant proposal. It means that if the price went through the roof, we could adjust for it 3 months into a 6 month grant.Hi @PaulSnow . What happens if the price of FCT doubles or triples because of a well time news release? Factom Inc would be getting over $1,000,000/month when this grant is based off $450,000/month-ish. That's a hell of a profit off the grant pool. I think the community would rather see the hypothetical $750,000 profit go towards other community projects instead of Factom Inc's pocket.I believe all the other grant proposals are priced in USD. Would be great if yours could be also.
Which is all the more reason to price the grant as $450,000 USD instead as 30,000 FCT. You can limit all your downside. :smileCertainly we might risk a huge haul. But we just saw an unexpected bleed of the price. I can't predict what happens over the next 3 months.
We have listed a pile of work we have to do in the grant.. I did do a huge amount of budgeting internally, but the variables are really tough to estimate. We have currency risk, complexity risk, staffing risks, funding risks (beyond the period of the grant), and more. With other grants, like the Gates foundation, we work through what we do and how we do it as we go. This is about the only way to do the discovery on work that has no precedent and is closer to real research than normal development.How many developers will be working on this grant?
Is there a rough breakdown of the 30,000 FCT a month budget?
I’m obviously fully for this project, and wholly support it and understand the importance, but....
That only matters if the grant is in dollars. We are explicitly not defining the grant in dollars, but in FCT, so 4.1.5 doesn't apply. If we did try to restrict the grant pool to dollar delineated grants (something the governance document does not require) we would be ham stringed right now exactly when we need to double down on development and investment in the Factom ecosystem.Just to be aware, if I read it correctly - According to Gov Doc 4.1.5 - Multiple payouts such as this require 2X FCT set aside to account for fluctuating price to ensure costs are met.
This means 60,000 FCT will be tied up monthly to this grant. More than enters the grant pool.
But it doesn't, as discussed in the thread about grant pool expectations. The FCT is allocated a week before issued, and by the time the tokens are issued, then currency risk has already bitten. Also, if we are using OTC to access the value, we may need to accumulate a number of payments to meet minimum trade requirements. That also can bite us. Further, taxes may apply based on the point at which the payment is scheduled instead of the coins created. That also can create many headaches.Which is all the more reason to price the grant as $450,000 USD instead as 30,000 FCT. You can limit all your downside. :smile
If we were making a million a month in the third month, then we could adjust the grant accordingly and reduce payments in the following 3 months to track the actual target value intended. Factom Inc. is not aiming for excessive profits, and have suggested a means to avoid most such likely swings by being able to adjust payouts at the mid point.@PaulSnow
2. Due to the non-answer of my second question, I'll assume excess profits from FCT price appreciation will be spent on whatever Factom Inc wants instead of projects that directly benefit both Factom inc and the community, unless I am otherwise corrected. All the more reason to price this grant in USD, just like every other grant proposal has done. It appears the community is fine giving Factom Inc $450,000K for development that benefits everyone (I am also). However, if Factom ink is going to rake-in $1,000,000+ in pure profits off the grant pool each month, then this is something entirely different. The community deserves clarity on how these excess profits would be spent.
When you take a job for a company like Factom Inc., you are not running for office like some public officials. So it is very different. ANO's have a standard payout, and a reason to campaign for their position as well. They are not required to detail who they are paying internally and how much.Sure I wasn’t asking for salaries to be made public; even though public officials do when paid from public money.
This isn’t all too dissimilar. And for transparency, ANO’s shared their proposed salaries.
Anyway, on behalf of the protocol - I was hoping for a whisp of detail before happily voting $500k a month to you.
Are you hiring extra developers to focus on core?
If FCT price goes up 100%, would you you publicly support reviewing the 30,000 FCT payout?In general, if the price goes up significantly, that allows us to scale way back on tokens drawn from the grant pool even as we maintain support from a dollar value perspective.
The intention is to design a mechanism for adjusting a grant in flight. First round may wish to Simply issue a 3-month grant, then a grant in 3 months at an adjusted rate.1. What is the realignment process exactly? Does Factom inc have to submit a new grant? Does the community have to call a meeting? Do the Guides? If no one calls a meeting, does the 30,000/month stay? Is this entirely up to the sponsor? Maybe I am missing something, but this feel like the process was left intentionally vague. Could you please drill down? Thanks
If FCT price goes up 100%, would you you publicly support reviewing the 30,000 FCT payout?
Thanks for your answers tonight
We do have the advantage of having 34 to 36 people already, and four years of hard work on the protocol. This does help with staffing in that we have a management and engineering structure already that can accommodate the new people.I'm all for the content and goals of the grant. My concern and problem is with the excess funding.
I'm sure you'll need to hire a bunch of new developers to get the work done, right? We all now we can't open a tap and just add new developers immediately (would love to). It will take time to find, hire and place them.
However, the grant starts in full from day one. This means there will be excess funds for sure.
I understand that varying the grant payout accounting for this or exchange rate fluctuation is not practical. But I would like to see some guarantee and check that the excess grant money will be used towards the goal of the grant given.
BTW this is also the main reason that we as ANO are a foundation: any excess funds we have can only be spend for the goals of the foundation.
I fully agree with that we all stand to profit, but we're talking about appr. $3,000,000 here. Considering this, I find asking few questions not putting them "through the (w)ringer". I hate to think what VCs would put Paul through.Every single grantee stands to profit if the price of the factoid increases, regardless of whether they ask for payment in FCT or peg it initially to USD. Why is Factom Inc. being put through the ringer more than anyone else?
I just mean that none of the other questions about budgets seems to be surrounding the potential take upon appreciation of the factoid. I get wanting to understand how the budget gets spent, but questions based upon "the number of factoids you request x 3 x $17 is a crazy number" seem completely irrelevant to any individual requestor.I fully agree with that we all stand to profit, but we're talking about appr. $3,000,000 here. Considering this, I find asking few questions not putting them "through the (w)ringer". I hate to think what VCs would put Paul through.
The intention is to design a mechanism for adjusting a grant in flight. First round may wish to Simply issue a 3-month grant, then a grant in 3 months at an adjusted rate.
I think eventually we need to have a process to manage a grant in flight. This needs to be designed and it isn't yet, but I see several ways to do it. Hence the wording.
To be clear, The Proposal is asking for a grant and a grant process. On the other hand, as Developers, we will need a design and the time to implement it too. So let's discuss and figure it out. This is not the only grant with design and implementation assuptions in need of software design and software requirements TBD.