NEM Labs Vs. NEM Foundation

General Discussion
#1

It’s important to be as objective as possible when reviewing these two proposals. If they are both funded we are obviously increasing the circulating supply and reducing our operating funds, both of which are bad for holders. Selling OTC is not some magic bullet. Including Ventures, and the two proposals in question (if funded), there should be on average close to 2million dollars of XEM Needing to be sold every month in 2019. If buyers are not available OTC, these will be sold on exchange. Also, some buyers on exchange may find themselves being served better OTC, further eroding what bit of a price floor that we have.

NEM Labs have already been working on catapult and have already demonstrated a practical business model for generating revenue. They propose to bring catapult as well as numerous features in for about 3 million dollars (this is already a huge amount!).

NF are proposing to bring us catapult as well as some other vague business ideas for 8million. While I respect the work so far in the NF and support their proposal, in light of the leaner model for catapult development proposed by NEM labs I suggest they redefine the role of the foundation and drastically reduce the amount they are asking for.

These are hard times and most blockchain companies have laid off all but their essential staff. We should be doing the same. All money being spent now should also be assessed in terms of the opportunity cost of spending XEM at under ten cents. It should used primarily to fuel essential development, revenue generating projects and token appreciating projects.

Comparing current expenditure of the NF to the expenditure of the previous foundation is false equivalence. The previous foundation was not strategically organized and it was operating when xem prices were as high as $2. Forget about it. What amount of money is needed to accomplish what specific goals? If NEM Labs can handle catapult, what is the extra 8 million to NF really giving us?

2 Likes
#2

That is not correct, 68% of total salaries is dedicated for tech staff. The CTO salary is included in the 18% of total salaries that is allocated for management and operations. That covers salaries for CEO, COO, CTO, Management Assistant and HR staff.

1 Like
#3

They’re both solid proposals but both are also a little… tone deaf. The foundation isn’t explicit enough about their public Catapult plans. This is but the timing is mind bendingly bad.

If it had been rolled out just after Jaguar tore the foundation a new one it would’ve been leapt on immediately but obviously no one was to know how things panned out.

I don’t want to hear about the resilience of differing teams in technical matters. I would rather see one team focused on making that one one time thing happen.

Once it’s over that hump free for alls are welcome.

And both proposals are not all that clear about what happens after this year. If 2020 comes around and there’s talk of ‘reboots’ I don’t think people are going to be too impressed.

1 Like
#4

Getting Catapult on public chain is not ‘one thing’ . It comprises of a multitude of tasks and it’s one of the biggest milestones NEM has ever seen. There is work on the core layer that is being worked on by core devs but there is also the API - REST layer, SDK and Tools layer and then the Front end layer ( wallets, block explorer , … ). Most of these layers consist of multiple projects that are ( or will be ) open source repositories on github. As we speak there are 26 repositories in github ( https://github.com/nemtech ) and that is certainly expected to grow in the future.

I’m not sure if I interpret your comment correctly but you sure won’t have to worry about anyone getting bored after public chain launch. There will always be a ton of work to do to improve the technology and keep up with competition. At this time we are all focusing on the vital/crucial things to get to public launch but actually what happens after that is at least as interesting , if not more interesting.

First of all , the NEM Labs proposal has some milestones included for 2020, on top of that maintaining everything is something that will take continuous effort.
Other than that , we have chosen not to list an entire/detailed roadmap for 2020 since it would certainly change by the time we get there. As we execute on the plan we’ll learn more about what the industry needs the most and that will be prioritised and communicated to the community before the end of the year.

1 Like
#5

My bad. Edited the original post to include more comments about salaries.

#6

NEM Labs include 589k for management (4.6 people). If you assume that they pay a CTO the same price that NF is estimating, that would leave an average of 94k for each other member. That’s paying the CEO and COO significantly more than they would get in another job according to their qualifications and experience. This is the same thing with NF probably, but we can’t see who they will get each position yet.

#7

I expect things to bloom after the launch.

I’m sure there are many, many different things to address. With that comes the need to allocate and delegate.

If both proposals pass how closely will they work together?

#8

Best way to answer that is by comparing how things already work with the core devs. They have never worked for NF, yet we are used to working closely with them. It will be very similar if both projects get funded but then across one more stakeholder.
The project is evolving more and more towards true open source management and that allows even for better management of all these activities.
It’s a proven way and many open source projects have much more contributors than what we have for NEM now. We hope it will continue to grow in the future. At this time He3 and Luxtag have made contributions but we expect that many NEMsps will also contribute in the future.

5 Likes