Lol at people shouting NWV. This prop is going to pass regardless of the moans.
If you want to challenge it then find an alternative development team and put forward a proposal.
Zaradar is right, there is no competition at the moment so what do you expect.
Personally I think the EK money+ has been split between the devs and new junior devs, whether that’s right or wrong is a moot point. If we don’t fund the L1 team development stops.
The one thing I agree with in your statement, get HCC more involved. Of course that’s dependent on if Jay would be interested.
Good evening all the team, first I would like to thank you all. values are coherent in relation to technology, those who criticize do not understand technology. But @Zaradar please stop generating controversy, nothing against you. I believe that now you are going to deliver value with the long awaited v2 update. My vote is yes. Ed. go ahead with the AI and be for Good for LUNC, cover too, as it’s past time to work for free even more with general complaining. success to all thank you very much.
This is Stockholm Syndrome. Decentralized governance only works if the community acts responsibly, and accepting proposals without any critical feedback is irresponsible. While it is tempting to adopt a “don’t worry, just trust the experts” attitude, that is a recipe for being taken advantage of especially in the crypto space.
The majority, if not all, the criticism is directed at a few specific aspects of this proposal that should be revised. I think we are all generally in agreement the JL1TF should continue, but this proposal needs editing.
I agree 100%!!! Just because the L1 teams asks for something doesnt by default mean it is good. The community needs to provide legitimate feedback. And the team needs to incorporate that feedback. Pretending the community is here just to blindly fund their requests is sort of insulting.
LUNC community wants from L1 devs to bring back the Terra classic chain to its original purpose , when and how?
I know your on team Jacob and LUNCDAO get over this chain security thing it’s over move on Allnodes and other people have proven this was never an issue and now is even less an issue as people have moved there nodes others have redelegated. Time to move on with your same old complaint.
If you can update the chain or provide a better team of people to do so please do so.
I personally believe Tobias “Zaradar” has the right to defend himself.
You ,LUNCDAO , Jacob can move on and stop the drama. It’s obvious who starts problems and who actually does something, and you my friend don’t do anything. ;0
So we should just accept the low quality of work from L1 team just cause there is no one else at the moment? I rather the LUNC development grinds to a halt then have CP funds be wasted on shit THAT IS NOT LUNC DEVELOPMENT.
All of you arguing while the SEC is laughing and seeing that they don’t have to do anything to maintain a blockchain on the floor. 
Why do we need a project manager now and we didn’t have one in the first Quarter. Did someone accept that role and didn’t mention it in the Q1 proposal? I don’t like the fact that they want a raise in pay knowing that we are broke!!! Who does that??? Unless changes are made, it’s a no for me. The so called project manager is posting polls on Twitter asking the community what they should work on and you are a project manger? Get serious!
An interesting proposal that has understandably attracted mixed responses.
Summary…
Personally i consider the team still getting its feet, so to ask for a significant raise is cheeky at best, also there have been numerous management/comms blunders that i feel have caused confidence issues for the chain.
For me to be comfortable accepting a significant spend proposal such as this I’d like to see the following points addressed.
Previous achievements
What was complete from Q1 that was in and out of scope, how effective was this, and what is left. Items incompleted what is the reasoning for this and the implications.
Communication
It appears we have a coc group, TGF, and a project manager yet there have been repeated PR blunders and members of the community attacked by the L1 team.
Whether those community members were right or wrong is irrelevant, the communication strategy from the team and its delivery has been amateur at best, and with a lot of technical jargon.
Consultation
Decisions appear to be made without Consultation with the community oversight committee and in instances even without them being informed. I’d like to know how the committee has consulted with the community and also how it has held the L1 team to account, and what the outcome of these ‘interactions’ have been.
Proposed tasks
In plain English without technical jargon, please explain all these suggested actions, what are the benefits of having them, or risks of not having them. There appears to be items in there that are ‘personal development’ type items that are not L1 scope specific.
.
I am not against out of scope items if there is clear rationale for them which may even imply the L1 teams scope is too restrictive.
Management
We have senior devs, that should be able to interact as a team on their own on top of this Tobias often portrays himself as a ‘father figure / manager’ to the team. So could we explain to the community what the roles and responsibilities of each member are, and what they have actually done over the last three months, including PR submitted etc.
As a member of arguably the most active L2 group (TerraCVita) on the chain we’ve had virtually zero communication from the L1 team, yet it appears that with the Coc, Project manager and TGF team the majority of the L1 team are ‘admin/support’. So I’m intrigued who is being consulted and about what, and what these roles in the team are delivering. We often hear the words ‘lean and agile’ used yet from the outside it is unclear how these apply.
For price comparision, for 7k in the UK you can get a head of service full time risk / project manager on a contracted basis with years of experience. My reason for raising this is that if we are paying top quartile compensation i think its fair to expect top quartile behaviour and deliverables.
Value for money
It would be useful to see a breakdown of contributions from individuals mapped against their costs to the community.
Also it would be useful to see a breakdown of expense costs. There appears to have been a number of computers etc bought yet i find it difficult to understand why. As someone with extensive personal contractor experience, contractors equipment is in my experience self funded, and not expensed. If we are providing equipment that is starting to feel like the L1 team is employed, and if that is a case it opens up many more questions including management, conduct, and expectations etc.
AI chain and Ed
This feels like a seperate project, though posdibly of great benefit to the chain and is not within the scope of the L1 team and I’m content that any involvement with thd L1 team, or any other team is voluntary or funded seperately.
Otherwise thank you for the submission and the team for their efforts in Q1.
I am a senior project manager with 14 years of professional experience in the IT industry. Have led and managed complex project teams, development teams, software implementation, large scale migration projects, and datacenter infrastructure projects. I took on the role managing the team early on in Q1, and although the job description was for a different role, I did the PM role throughout the first quarter.
The SEC is an American institution whose authority to regulate Terra Classic is questionable at best.
Would you please:
Thank you.
Inverse Rabbi indicator should be used - so a yes to this proposal.
While not everything was done in Q1 that was supposed to be done, the pay rise is on par with current economical situation across the globe.
This is naivety. Say what you want but you’re not going to change the fact that the prop isn’t going to change and it will pass.
Your idealism belies reality. You can’t cater to 100% of the people, there’s people here who support Zaradar. They’re not going to be disenfranchised just because others have an issue particularly when there’s no incentive to do so.
I go back to my point. If anyone has such a big issue then stop posturing and source a dev team and put up a competetive counter prop, hell if it’s good I’ll vote for it.
Your time in this community is over, no one knows you because you are no one. Bye.
I’m going with that as well.
Can we close the deal of the spending proposal at 135k?
I honestly find it funny how quick many go to attack, but bring no substance.
@RabbiJebediah at least puts his reasoning out there, which I usually come into agreement with because the issues he brings up are legitimate, yet you all attack him and say you will vote yes just because with out putting your own reasoning behind it.
stop cutting off the nose, just to spite the face.
In very simple terms: You have a proposal that offers up work that is outlined for ~140k/3 months.
We can gauge, even if being non-technical about it, that this contracted work does proceed with not only fixing up the code, but also modernizes it.
The other option is - None. No alternative has been suggested. Don’t like Tobias, yet no sourcing of an alternative. The comments come from emotional pov.
So, the jew in me, sees this proposal as a mighty good deal. Not only does it actually bring us forward, but we do it at a ridiculously low price.
Best yet - not a cent from our own pockets.