Sorry sir but i’ll vote NO on this.
The community had enough of grifters and scammers. We placed our trust in people who did not delivered what was promised and instead was demanding more money to keep the grift going. Also We were promised swaps/repegs and we just another scam (ziggy) proposal from a guy who just want to pay his debts and maybe running away. We need to give the opportunity to fresh people and if they want to charge less and getting paid only when results are available, then that’s a yes for me. BUT I WON’T VOTE YES ON THIS. The L1 task force has his chance and they blew it.
1 Like
Who are these devs and their credentials?Who will be managing these devs?
3 Likes
Managing what? They have Q2 tasks outlined. They need to stfu and code. What’s a use for a non-coder manager or you tube mouthpieces? If we have failures like Zaradar after 2 months, they get fired, replaced and the show goes on.
5 Likes
a person who is a manager (leader) of developers with extensive knowledge about the work to be done (blockchains). Not a person who is only going to answer messages or write some proposal or doc of tasks carried out.
2 Likes
Why does a small team need a manager? Project managers make sense when the team is large making it difficult for individual team members to work in concert. A manager adds value because they are removed from the micro level work so as to provide macro level feedback to the team.
We don’t have a micro/macro dynamic here; it’s all micro. I would love Terra Classic development to scale to the point a project manager would be justified, but we aren’t there yet.
We’re talking about a handful of people. At this size it’s not project management, it’s babysitting. The dev team doesn’t need a babysitter.
2 Likes
Did you read what vinh said about the role of the project manager? Has anyone of you have ever implemented any form of blockchain system?
Are you serious?
There ya go! 
%
At the end of of it all the community does not have an appetite for one person recommending a team for LUNC. We are tired of this nonsense where individuals feel they know more about blockchain development than the real developers. Some of us are taking this new concept of decentralization too far. LUNC will not survive if we dont embrace a certain level of centralization.
2 Likes
really excited to see this is not passing rn
I am keeping a screenshot of this for memory since I love to prove people wrong later.
2 Likes
Key benefits:
- Schedule management and task prioritization
- Risk management and mitigation (probability vs impact)
- Options analysis
- Forecasting, tracking, managing expenses, and reporting on budget
- Communication planning
- Upgrade planning
- Go-live readiness assessment
- Performance management of resources, ensuring high quality code is shipped
All of the above items are usually not a skillset that developers have, and they certainly do not have the time for it. One of the previous complaints was that there was not enough transparency, visibility, or communication. Now that all of these items have been provided, it seems as though there are some folks who no longer want this.
6 Likes
How will you get this? The previous team has no obligation to transfer their knowledge. This borders on “intellectual rape”.
Hope you dont get peanut results.
"
It is not advisable for a project manager to work for free, especially if they are providing professional services to a client or an organization. Project managers are responsible for overseeing the entire software development project, which includes planning, organizing, directing, controlling, and monitoring all aspects of the project. This is a complex and time-consuming task that requires specialized knowledge and skills.
Working for free not only devalues the work of the project manager, but it can also lead to several negative consequences. For instance:
- Lack of motivation: If a project manager is not being paid for their work, they may lack the motivation to perform their tasks to the best of their ability.
- Conflict of interest: If a project manager is working for free, they may be less likely to advocate for the best interests of their client or organization, as they may feel beholden to other stakeholders or interests.
- Reduced quality: Working for free may mean that a project manager is not able to devote sufficient time and resources to the project, which may result in a lower quality outcome.
- Legal and ethical issues: In some cases, working for free may be considered a breach of ethical or legal standards, especially if the project manager is working in a regulated industry."
The project manage should negotiate a fair compensation that reflects the value of his services and expertise.
At the end of it all, the community will decide our direction. I have no appetite for individuals trying to satisfy their egos at the expense of the chain. At the current rate the building of the chain will not resume until at least one month and then what? More drama is around the corner.
3 Likes
Has it crossed your mind that at this moment the community is just concerned about the present proposal and not yours? Your proposal will have its days before the LUNC grand jury soon.
1 Like
If Steve wanted to help LUNC he’d work for free until we get the chain to the point we can pay him. Given all he brings to the table are soft skills (non-programming work), him taking $7000/month at a time when we can barely afford development is an insult to everyone in this community.
1 Like
At the end of the day, it’s all about the money that some are getting and that some are don’t, isn’t it Jebediah ?!?!
I just hope the community comes to senses before it’s to late …
1 Like
If you are really passionate about lunc work for free. It just looks like an insult to us paying you 7k per month to “manage” 3 people when we don’t have enough devs.
1 Like
Bruh, you’re not worth $7000/month for PART-TIME WORK!
You’re not worth even $5000/month - that’s another dev salary!
I’d put you at somewhere between **$1500/month (given you work part-time) ** if we had a healthy blockchain that hadn’t just been through the worst crash in recent crypto history! You’re leeching money that could go toward more engineers! This dumb idea that 3-4 devs is enough only feeds back into my belief you’re all just content to siphon the CP for salaries while doing little actual work to grow the chain and ecosystem! Why work to moon LUNC when you’re getting paid anyway, right Steve?
We need a dev team of 20+, not 3, Steve! You gonna work pro bono until we can fund a 20+ dev team? Of course not, because you don’t believe in LUNC long-term. Neither you, nor Tobias, nor Marco… if you did you’d take minimal, token salaries, and would be hyping the chain to everyone and everywhere, instead of leeching the CP and fudding all our investments every chance you get. No one bought into LUNC just to watch a handful of you from the US turn it into a tradfi whore to the SEC and Uncle Sam, all while draining the community pool to cover your personal liability! Just f*ck off already!
WE. ARE. NOT. GOING. TO. PAY. YOU. ANYMORE.
If you truly want to help the chain (and your own LUNC bags!), then work pro bono. Work for free for 6-12 months until we get to a point you can be salaried. You’ve got a LUNC bag (presumably) so you have a vested interest in the chain doing well – we all do! – hence you should stop grifting the community pool and instead switch over to a startup mentally.
WORK FOR YOU BAGS, STEVE, NOT YOUR PAYCHECK!
Shalom! 
2 Likes
Ca we learn anything good or bad about this proposal which may be applicable to the present situation?
1 Like
Corpo-speak for babysitting. I’m surprised “maximizing synergies” didn’t make the list.
Seriously, juniors might need schedule management and task prioritization, but professionals who are asking the equivalent of six-figure salaries should not. What experienced dev needs a manager to tell them whether their code is ready to go live?
Speaking of which, what’s the difference between “go-live readiness assessment” and “ensuring high quality code is shipped?” Sounds like a meaningless distinction created to add another bullet point of corporate jargon.
2 Likes
This stuff again? Great use of Agora.
Ok, just to keep people in perspective here on a Project Manager. I have done development in a team that has included a project manager, and have worked in teams that have not. Here is my impression:
- If you actually want to keep track of work, be able to see your milestones happen, have clearly defined scope and requirements (of what you are working on and what the end goal is suppose to look like), have good mechanisms for feedback loops that actually work, have an actual build procedure that comes with version/source control, to keep from revisiting the same code again and again because it was not what the client thought they wanted, to have developers work actually used (rather than scrapped or quietly abandoned), to provide accountability in a way that is helpful and constructive to everyone, to provide accountability in testing in a constructive and helpful way to everyone, to provide an environment where multiple people can work on one project accomplishing aspects of a common task or tasks successfully, to provide useful analysis, carry on a project with any amount of complexity to it that has multiple people working together, you will use a project manager.
Project Managers are not unessential to a team’s success.
4 Likes