The Splinterlands team are the ones that hold the most SPS thus have the most governance control. Asking them to vote on losing their jobs is likely to have the outcome one would expect. Them voting No to the proposal. From my understanding there is still 80+ employees plus potentially some independent contractors. That is still a big number, I wouldn't be surprised to see some more cuts. I'm also surprised at some of the comments I been hearing that came out of the town-hall in regards to how much money is needed to run or keep running for XX months. I haven't watched the town-hall yet so I could be getting wrong info. Millions have been invested by players. I don't see why there isn't a very large reserve in Fiat from previous invested funds. But that is easy for me or anyone else to say from the outside looking in. Splinterlands is very generous with the rewards it hands out and I bet they are a little too generous in the pay department for their employees as well. I feel bad for those who lost their jobs and wish them the best with finding another but 150 plus employees had me asking myself Why so many. I believe cuts were coming and likely needed regardless of this down turn market.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
well I think it would have to be slightly adjusted from the current proposal system anyway.... more of a race to the top to keep your job! hehe. Its a pretty horrendous thought....but then so much about society and human nature is horrendous anyway.... I mean imagine getting sacked in secret when you're supposedly working for a DAO?
The question of whether the company have screwed up their investments or taken on too many staff or positioned themselves poorly for the bear market is a head scratcher for sure.... but in my mind, its all just more reason to open up a portion of serious decision making to the DAO. The core team would still get to put the parameters on, like how much of the companys investment can be voted on by the DAO, what the rough wage budget should be after layoffs etc. Then the community gets to weigh in and feel some responsibility for the survival and direction of the company. Obviously long term, you'd want those core team members to be voted in or out as well so that you've always got a senate who are (partially) elected by the people. I don't know.... I guess Im impatient for revolutionary digital governance and maybe its just not quite ready yet....but I see these major turning points as big opportunities to bring the community further onboard and so far this one is being missed
well I think it would have to be slightly adjusted from the current proposal system anyway.... more of a race to the top to keep your job! hehe. Its a pretty horrendous thought....but then so much about society and human nature is horrendous anyway.... I mean imagine getting sacked behind closed doors when you're supposedly working for a DAO?
The question of whether the company have screwed up their investments or taken on too many staff or positioned themselves poorly for the bear market is a head scratcher for sure.... but in my mind, its all just more reason to open up a portion of serious decision making to the DAO. The core team would still get to put the parameters on, like how much of the companys investment can be voted on by the DAO, what the rough wage budget should be after layoffs etc. Then the community gets to weigh in and feel some responsibility for the survival and direction of the company. Obviously long term, you'd want those core team members to be voted in or out as well so that you've always got a senate who are (partially) elected by the people. I don't know.... I guess Im impatient for revolutionary digital governance and maybe its just not quite ready yet....but I see these major turning points as big opportunities to bring the community further onboard and so far this one is being missed
i think that was best said twice dont you? hehe