Team (5 strong yes to hire for permanent)

50

*Name

🐉Jack

Bounties (0 yes for 1-time engagement)

0

Contributors (2 yes for 1-month renewals, 20-hour per week)

40

DAO (5-of-9 governors for 3-month elections)

-20

Fellows (3 yes for 3-month renewals, full-time)

30

On tight core groups vs fluid contributions, how to split among the employment structures?

For full time hires, I think we need to level set first, before we decide on whether it’s 5 strong yes. We lack the interviewer training, level setting before/after, and get the process approved by executive team, so that he doesn’t need to be the final approver and can decentralize hiring with confidence, with frequent reporting and check-ins with leadership. Otherwise, we should just spell it out as 4 strong yes + final approval. We had an 8 Strong Yes for a candidate, but the final approval is pushed back. So this 5 strong yes is artificial. This might scale now, but won’t scale when we have 10+ full time hires a month. Once we get that decentralized decision agreed upon, I’d suggest an average point average of 3.7 (out of 4.0 scale) with 5-6 interviewers, like a summa cum laude without any Strong No’s. Introduce a huddle before (30 mins) and one after each interview (30 mins) to then discuss, and interviewers are given one last chance to change their votes at the huddle, and a decision is then reached. On DAOs, nuf said. We need to each join other sustainable DAOs before daring ourselves to approve any DAOs.