• MagicShel@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean they would need to be paid, but idk about a percentage. Mostly just to fairly compensate them for the time spent vetting deals.

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What’s savvy about getting paid just for your time? You need to get paid for expertise, opportunities, networking… that’s at least 10%, since a non-profit wouldn’t have preference shares.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m leery about a percentage just because I perceive a conflict of interest. Overall compensation of 10% might be about right, but tying actual compensation to the cost of stuff that is bought creates a perverse incentive to overspend on things. That’s money donated for the betterment of humanity, not so I can have a 3 acre swimming pool.

        But IDK maybe I’m looking at it wrong.

        • jarfil@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think you are looking at it kind of wrong, in that: with a savvy board, the first savvy thing they would do, would be to guarantee their own self-benefit, going head first into a conflict of interest… meaning you can’t have a project like that driven by a savvy board, instead you need an altruistic, idealistic, etc. board… but then, a non-savvy board, would be much likely to just squander the money, or get swindled out of it, so… I don’t think a project like that would ever work as expected.