Was the initial Yambassador grant application malicious?
Background
The Yambassador silo was the first silo approved by the DAO. The original proposal and forum post was up for two weeks before being put to vote and was one of the most active posts in 2022. Just a week after the vote was approved Ross/galloway.eth put out a proposal that would make the first grant for the silo redundant as a counter. This counter bid was put up for less than 48 hours. This proposal countered the original with a similar scope of work for substantially less money and an accelerated delivery time frame. This proposal passed and another proposal by Ross went up to Retract/ Cancel the Yambassador Grant nearly a month after its approval. This latest vote is ongoing, but it does not address the issue of reimbursing Snake for his contributions.
Moving forward
The issue is that Ross didn’t just counter the proposal with his own rate. Ross made the claim that the Yambassador silo was malicious in the way that the application was written. He did not provide any evidence to substantiate this claim. He also countered the proposal with below average rates and an unrealistic time frame of two weeks. Evidence of that being it has already been two weeks since the “Uma delegate voting testing” proposal and Ross has increased his rate in those two weeks (70 USD/hour -> 85 USD/hour).
I contend that the DAO does not believe that I was malicious by supporting Ross’s counter bid. Bids and counter bids should be a part of the grant/silo approval process, but undercutting after a proposal has passed (especially by a core contributor) is in bad form. It undermines the grant and silo process as future participants in the process may hesitate to put forth new ideas and proposals.
I can accept that I was outbid, but it is much more difficult to accept that the DAO is moving forward with my idea yet believe that I was malicious in proposing it. Given the circumstances I believe that I should be compensated for two weeks worth of my time researching, submitting and working on this project at 85/hr. This totals to $6,800 (70/30 Stable/TWAP YAM). The DAO can afford reimbursement, but I believe it cannot afford leaving this matter unresolved.
Snake presents the DAO with three options
- Yambassador was malicious.
- Yambassador was not malicious, but no reimbursement should be made.
- Reimburse Snake $6,800 for his work on Yambassador.
| Voter | Cast Power | Vote & Rationale |
|---|---|---|
 0xce15...EFF39C | 70,212 | Reimburse Snake for two weeks. |
 0x5C79...089524 | 25 | Yambassador was malicious. |
 0x6129...E1B567 | 20 | Reimburse Snake for two weeks. |
 0xf640...dE4174 | 20 | Reimburse Snake for two weeks. |
 0x8691...3b590d | 10 | Reimburse Snake for two weeks. |
VOTE POWER
Proposal Status
- Sat June 18 2022, 02:59 amVoting Period Starts
- Wed June 22 2022, 12:00 amEnd Voting Period
Current Results
1-Reimburse Snake for two weeks.
70,300.843
2-Yambassador was malicious.
60.498