The following reflects the views of L2BEATās governance team, composed of @kaereste and @Sinkas, and itās based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
Weāre voting FOR the proposal and choosing 10% grant vested.
In general, we are against retroactive compensation for the kind of work outlined in the proposal, as itās not an easy task to define how much time or effort was put into it and how much value it created for the DAO. We also donāt want to open the floodgates for other such requests, either now or in the future.
However, we also understand the situation the proposal authors found themselves in since going through the governance process first to get the āapprovalā from the DAO to apply to LTIPP, receive the grant, and then manage it would probably mean that weād miss the chance. On top of that, we do not want to set a precedent of people doing work for the DAO and not getting paid.
With that in mind, we believe that the retroactive compensation request is fair. Given the size of the grant and the time and effort needed to manage it after receiving it (which we are familiar with from our involvement in Arbitrum and understanding of how LTIPP worked), we find the requested amount sensible.
Going forward, we should try and avoid finding ourselves in such situations by having someone in charge of ensuring such opportunities are capitalized on. @Francom, as the Head of DAO Ops could be helpful in that regard.