Validator DAO Term 1 Funding Request

Name of DAO

Validator Dao Term 1

Proposal overview

This is an official request for funding to be paid either to our multisig address or individual wallets.

It has been 9 months since VDAO1 became elected yet we are still to receive funding despite being promised on numerous occasions.

We were asked for a vote from the community. Voting ended 5 weeks ago, quorum was passed and it was unanimous.


More Details:

MultiSig Address:

Proposal ask

Amounts as voted on and agreed, reflecting the average ONE price at the time. Not including interest lost from being unable to stake.

Name Address June-August September October Total
@babylonode one14xkvsj8gnwl2tnu9wahfru35x8ppveaqdx5cnf 92,595.29 17,017.98 6,212.72 115825.99
@Mars_Initiative one1q5n5t3zr5dr3v7rkpzmcmxta6fdjz3k5kxqtg7 109,519.56 14,096.19 6,212.72 129828.47
@JCRoneValidator one18r3lv27kw5ye203m0x3w58cr734wy2wqa6l8ur 109,519.56 17,803.72 6,212.72 133536
@easynodeone one18t3wcv0t96vkw3l2ftw877kd7fcrjwtkprq0kk 109,519.56 16,575.82 6,212.72 132308.1
@MaffazOne one1prz9j6c406h6uhkyurlx9yq9h2e2zrpasr2saf 109,519.56 17,787.68 6,212.72 133519.96

I hope we can get this paid and in the past. Term 1 did a phenomenal job pioneering the VDAO and they deserve to be compensated for it!


Thanks Rob! We appreciate the kind words.


Hello @Babylonode, @Wenneson,, @easynode and @Maffaz -

You guys have been incredibly patient with me and I appreciate it. Part of the delay in responding to your request was finding the balance between what you were asking for and what would show transparency and fairness based on the expectations of public accountability.

I went back and forth on this for a while trying to figure out the best and most rational outcome for the VDAO Term 1 governors. This is what I have decided based on the feedback with the rest of the DAO Funding team.

(a) We will be providing an additional grant to the multisig address of the ValidatorDAO to finance compensation for work done in the months of June, July and August.

(b) The compensation will be in ONE tokens. The number of tokens is a product of: (i) hours worked, (ii) value of the token on the day an acceptable timesheet was submitted.

For example: Let us say that I worked 10 hours in June. The time sheet I submitted in September was not acceptable as it was not transparent. On the day I submitted this incomplete timesheet, the token price was at $0.05. I revised my time sheet in October. On the day I revised my timesheet in October to provide adequate reporting of the work I have done, the token value was $0.15.

As a result, my compensation will be: (10 Hours)x($75 per hour) = $750. $750/$0.15 = 5,000 ONEs

(c) Based on the information in this Public Timesheet I have made the following determinations:

  • @Babylonode first submitted his timesheet on 9.17.21. It was incomplete. It was completed on 12.23.21. On December 23rd, based on CoinGecko, the token price started at $0.23 and ended the day at $0.25 yielding an average price that day of $0.24. Babylonode submitted for 100 hours. At $75 an hour, he was due compensation of $7,500 or - at the valuation at that time, 31,250 ONE Tokens.

  • Mars Initiative first submitted his timesheet on 9.15.21. It was incomplete. It hasn’t been completed. No compensation can be offered for an incomplete timesheet.

  • first submitted his timesheet on 9.20.21. His timesheet was complete. On September 20th, based on CoinGecko, the token price started at $0.14 and ended the day at $0.12 yielding an average price that day of $0.13. Jimbo submitted for 120 hours. At $75 an hour, he was due compensation of $9,000 or - at the valuation at that time, 69,230.77 ONE Tokens.

  • @easynode first submitted his timesheet on 9.15.21. It was incomplete. It was completed on 11.9.21. On November 9th, based on CoinGecko, the token price started at $0.31 and ended the day at $0.30 yielding an average price that day of $0.305. Patrick submitted for 120 hours. At $75 an hour, he was due compensation of $9,000 or - at the valuation at that time, 29,508.20 ONE Tokens.

  • @Maffaz first submitted his timesheet on 9.14.21. It was incomplete. It was completed on 11.3.21. On November 3rd, based on CoinGecko, the token price started at $0.29 and ended the day at $0.29 yielding an average price that day of $0.29. At $75 an hour, he was due compensation of $9,000 or - at the valuation at that time, 31,034.48 ONE Tokens.

Based on this analysis, I will be requesting that @lij deposit 161,023.45 ONE Tokens into the ValidatorDAO multisig wallet to be disbursed as the Validator Community sees fit.

Here is a quick table for ease of review:

I believe this resolves the question of the VDAO Term 1 Governors compensation. Again, I appreciate the patience while we sort through the early stages of building and operating DAOs.



Please confirm that this is the multisig for the Validator DAO:

0x13AA46E8c8378Bd4c4546962bb66935e7630364D @Maffaz @easynode

Thank you,


Will they be getting reimbursed for the months after June - August?


funded: Harmony Blockchain Explorer


Hey Sam, part of VDAO 1 is still sleeping (different timezones) so I wanted to give them time to respond. My question is about the September and October timesheets. What’s going to happen with those? They were listed in the original funding thread and the governance vote.




Just to be clear, before we proceed…

Harmony are completely ignoring the community vote on this matter?
If so, why is it being ignored?
Why ask for a vote in the first place?
What was the purpose?

Harmony published to the world that we would be funded on 11th June 2021. If that happened we would not have this issue right now…

We based our commitments on the following articles. Promises that Harmony have now changed??
We were just a PR exercise to Harmony? After we served our purpose Harmony stopped talking about VDAO. Even to this day, the VDAO is not mentioned anywhere.

More to the point. What happened to those funds that were promised??? Why did they not go to the DAO?

These are YOUR words @Sam . Now you are saying that you, yourself are wrong? Why is that the fault of VDAO1?

Here: Harmony Foundation Kickstarts the Validator DAO

and here:

And here:

This was also published shortly before and there are many messages of promises to give bootstrap funding to delegate and fund the DAO from these rewards. They also never materialised. What happened to the Bootstrap funds if not given to / used for funding the DAO?

"The Validator DAO has access to staking rewards"

So the goalposts have been moved yet again.
@Wenneson is not getting paid because “Harmony says so” - VDAO1 and the community were supposed to decide payments, not the centralised body of Harmony - 2 fingers from Harmony to the community and VDAO1.

Sept and Oct have not even been mentioned - Are we supposed to expect no funding for this period?

VDAO1 appear to be taking the hit for Harmony’s incompetence on this matter and it a sad state of affairs to see a multi million dollar company attempting to penny pinch and haggle hard working members of the community.

VDAO1 members are still highly active in the community and have put in a lot more work that just VDAO1 and will no doubt continue to do so.

People that gave up their time and worked damn hard for the community, time away from families and leisure. A lot more than the 10 hours Max a week specified.

We did the job asked and accepted the max payment of 10 hours but in reality it was more like 20 hours a week.

VDAO1 paved the way for future DAOS. Both the charter and the ethos has been consistently used as an example of what a DAO should be and (apart from the centralised intervention from Harmony)

VDAO1 created a truly decentralised DAO, complete with Charter and that is still in operation today. The community truly has power over the VDAO and this will no doubt continue.


Harmony funded literally every other single DAO including subsequent VDAOs and ignored our requests.

I have only frustration from this blatant shunning exercise.

Harmony should do well to remember that “Actions speak louder than words”


Sam, I respectfully disagree with everything you wrote here. Keep in mind we still have a recorded video from our very first meeting where you state that pay is decided between the five of us— not you or the Harmony team. It was our job to keep each other accountable. A task we did and all 5 governors can attest we each went above and beyond with the work we did. You came up with the timesheet MONTHS after the fact. Sure, I could have went in and recorded fictitious records in the spreadsheet to give me the hours, but it wouldn’t have been right or accurate.

Secondly paying out only half of the hours at a rate of ONE when it was closer to an all time high? Really? Every unethical and not very harmonious. Not one bit. I’ve never been so disappointed.

Third, what’s the point of a community vote? Not very decentralized at all here. If you truly want this to go away, I urge you to open up negotiations with all 5 governors so we can lay this to bed.


This is what the community passed with 96 yes and 0 no votes, can we please do this right?

We also have our own multi-sig that we had to setup for this, please avoid using the VDAO wallet it’s broken.

VDAO1 multi-sig: 0x65f028CDA0FB723b51edDF8DD852375247eE2f9c


This is important.

Who currently controls the VDAO Multisig? 0x13AA46E8c8378Bd4c4546962bb66935e7630364D

This multisig has currently 586,951 ONEs in it.

@easynode @Maffaz @Wenneson


That’s the VDAO’s multisig wallet, they control it but are having some technical issues → Harmony Multisig Wallet 0x13AA46E8c8378Bd4c4546962bb66935e7630364D

This is the multi-sig we setup for our payout a few months ago → Harmony Multisig Wallet 0x65f028CDA0FB723b51edDF8DD852375247eE2f9c

VDAO3 members who may know everyone on it @Maffaz @StrongMindsHold @ben2k_Stakeridoo


Those are the actual owners, we post it on talk with every Payroll :slight_smile:

CoinChowder 0x9a68F96C8cC59AFF169bE5417dE84930439873FD
HankTheCrank 0x65B69Da3D9Aa99cb81ECF908FB25656856c957A6
HoundOne 0xAcF55BeC11D38A1a13dAa13668032CaA2ca59c2D
BrotherOne 0xb8E0aBb5Ae527137237567ddD167c338E541429e 0x08c4596B157EafAE5EC4E0fE629005Bab2a10C3D
PeaceLoveHarmony 0x53d2ae319920Cf1Ea1Ef754e91150d6C356a815d
Stakeridoo 0x133763F7d93f2bC4241f9855F71bE5042f020A20
StrongMindsHold 0xd143988234dF9117f4Baa00b5f8D4A56d64e56eA 0x4bB58cFEa648593c88afBAD5e30C09eFE8783545


Also please note that a few of the wallet addresses in the current VDAO Multisig may change as we’ve been experiencing a lot of issues when using the validator wallet as an owner.

Other governors who have chosen to have a separate wallet are able to sign transactions without issue. So those who have used their validator wallet may be updating it, which means the list above may change.

1 Like

This is accurate. If you use a validator wallet to sign with the multisig wallet, it does not allow for a transaction to go though. We have have been stuck for about a week trying to see if we can pass a transaction through. Since finding out this issue, those that had the validator wallets. Assigned to the multisig will change them to “hopefully” fix this issue.

1 Like

Hey Everyone -
I am going to make a series of responses.

I recognize that… my responses will make several of you angry and disappointed. For that, I apologize.

I was wrong.

I prepared a plan based on no prior experience in working with the initial governors of the Validator DAO. I, unilaterally, assumed several things that did not turn out to be accurate. The plan that I proposed was simply not feasible.

I will be making specific responses to the statements below. I will likely alienate several of you and I am sure that I will be called names and told that I am unethical and unjust. I am sorry if you feel that I am not being fair. I am working hard not simply to find the most equitable solution - but the one whose precedent can be viewed as a guidepost for later actions.


This is in the hands of the Validator DAO.

The Validator community passed - with unanimity - the vote to pay you out, so it is the Validator DAO governors responsibility to do so.

All DAOs share three things in common: Shared material interest, Shared Assets, Shared Responsibility. The Validator DAO community has a shared responsibility over the VDAO treasury. They all chose to spend it that way, so it should be spent that way.

Because it has been approved - the governors responsibility is to follow the will of the community and issue the payment.

This –

Doesn’t seem like decentralization. It doesn’t seem like following the will of the community. It smacks of something else entirely.


(A) There is nothing about the community that I want to “go away”. I think you misunderstand my position. I do not think it would be ethical nor wise to open up a behind the scenes negotiation with the VDAO Term 1 to “make this problem disappear”. ALL of the information is in public. All of the details regarding the distance between our positions is clear and in the light of day. My goal was to “resolve the question” re: VDAO1 Comp… not to make anything go away.

(B) My engagement in this post directly - rather than asking someone else to do it - is the closest I will get to “opening up negotiations”. I am communicating with the VDAO Term 1 openly, where everyone can see my position.

The Validator Community held a vote about what to do with the Validator DAO treasury. This is as decentralized as it gets. Forgive me for a bit of bold text for a moment:

All DAOs (regardless of their mandate and purpose) share three features: Shared Material Interest, Shared Assets, Shared Responsibility

The Validator Community has a shared responsibility to use their shared assets in the best possible way. VDAO Term 1 proposed a compensation plan to the Validator community. The Validator community voted, unanimously, to spend their treasury on approving the compensation plan. Therefore, the VDAO is responsible for paying out the VDAO Term 1 compensation plan.

That is decentralization.

You may argue that paying out the VDAO Term 1 Compensation will bankrupt the DAO. That is true. This is what Shared Responsibility looks like. If you argue that Harmony should cover for the Validator DAO… well, we have. We have funded the Validator DAO to the tune of $208,035 USD based on a token price of $0.12. If I use the same metrics I used to determine the compensation numbers (i.e. average price the day of payout), Harmony has funded the Validator DAO to the tune of $210,890 USD. The Validator DAO is one of the highest funded DAOs in Harmony.