[DIS] Use USD amounts for DAO payments, calculated on the date of payment

Our proposal has entered the voting stage. Please proceed to vote:


The following proposal was written by Leigh, and I’m posting it on his behalf because he is currently unavailable due to a family emergency.

Hello Community,

It has come to my attention for the DAO process that something needs to be corrected in the way that CKB DAO proposals are paid out. I have been previously looking back at all proposals to see what could be improved, and I noticed this proposal. Please refer here if you have no previous knowledge;

This is a very serious subject and the future of the DAO’s financial integrity is questionable currently. My hope is this will spark discussion/debate or mutual agreement.

I’ve always assumed that when a pay out in CKB is requested, it always equals the requested amount of CKB on the day of the price of CKB. I understand that this is not the case.
This is not ideal business sense. Let me give a few examples:

Example no 1

When John goes to a restaurant in another country, and pays for a meal, he does not pay for a meal with yesterday’s exchange rate. John doesn’t even pay for a meal with tomorrow’s exchange rate. John will pay for TODAY’S meal with TODAY’S exchange rate because that’s the amount required to pay for the meal at the time of eating.

This does not seem to be the case with the DAO funds. Because the proposals (quite rightly) go through an extended period to be discussed and spoken about, according to the DAO rules, when 3 weeks elapse, the same amount of CKB will be paid out from initially proposed. This makes no sense.

CKB and other crypto currencies are hyper volatile and the price can suffer highs and lows of extreme amounts even in a day. (let alone 3 weeks)

This in essence either then pays out too much CKB (if the price rises rapidly within said period) or pays out too little (if the price falls). This is bad news for potential projects that wish to cement a stable amount of money to sustain their projects and to carry them through to the end. Giving better stability to the growth of community endorsed projects.

This does not make for a stable business environment. But further so, it gets worse if the project is using or adhering to staged phases and milestone payments.

If this is the case then the money will dwindle further along those milestones, or overpay. Either way, this is not business savvy.

So my suggestion is that the proposals are set only in fiat price, and upon the day of each payout, they are converted into the relevant amount of CKB based on the opening price of CKB on CoinMarketCap. The exact amount of CKB can then be transferred to the grant recipients and it’s up to the project to convert it IMMEDIATELY to a stable fund that they can manage over that period of time. Much like when John pays for a meal in another country due to exchange rates on that day.

So here’s what a multi-staged proposal payout might look like as an example…

Example 2

‘Project John’ asks for 30k dollars/fiat for a proposal that is paid in 3 stages, voted for and finalised by the community.

Phase 1 of the payment gets paid at $10,000 worth of CKB, CKB might be $0.01 at the time of issuance based on the opening price of CKB on CoinMarketCap, then 1,000,000 CKB is sent accordingly.

Phase 2 of the payment then gets paid 3 months later but the price of CKB is now $0.02 so 500,000 CKB is distributed.

Phase 3 of the payment then gets paid a further 3 months later and the price of CKB has severely dropped to a price of 0.005, so 2,000,000 CKB is distributed.

I cannot see any other way to make this more efficient, for both Project John and the DAO funds.

Unfortunately crypto and CKB aren’t efficient modes of payment for real life scenarios and especially when time elapsed scenarios are on the table.

It’s also important to note that projects SHOULD immediately convert the funds to something stable, which in turn leaves them in good financial condition on their journey.

This proposal would be for all future DAO payments, and would also retroactively affect any grant recipients currently with outstanding payments, assuming they consent to this new rule.

If anyone would also like to discuss this, it’s a really important issue to discuss. Please like the proposal and then vote or discuss it in the comments what you think is a better alternative.


I support Leigh’s proposal and believe we should implement this immediately. Just in the last week, CKB has seen price swings of over 25%. This much volatility makes long-term projects unviable.


I’m also totally in agreement with this, I think something needs to be done soon, expecially as we are seeing more high value proposals which will involve long timelines.

Terry had some issues with the original proposal from Jacky, such as the fact that this system could be difficult to implement if and when the Community DAO develops an on-chain governance system. This is probably a very good point, but it seems like we are shooting ourselves in the foot in the short term, becasue of something that might possibly occur sometime in the future. That’s my opinion anyway, but Terry @poshboytl ,can you please let us know your thoughts on this again?


I agree with this proposal. Projects calculate their expected costs in fiat terms. When they receive funds in CKB, they will need to sell it to cover those costs. By not accounting for price swings, this introduces significant uncertainty and unpredictability into a project’s operations in a way that is completely avoidable.

Furthermore, given that the DAO rules enforce milestones, projects with long-term funding may not receive what was originally agreed. Or, they may receive surplus to what they needed.

Ensuring that CKB amounts are adjusted based on its USD pair guarantees that projects are not underpaid or overpaid relative to what was requested. This enhances DAO efficiency and fairness by only releasing what was originally agreed by the DAO.

To address some of the previous objections I saw raised:

– We should think in crypto terms not fiat terms

I agree with the sentiment, but until services accept CKB payment there will always need to be a conversion. And either the price of CKB remains stable (not realistic), or we account for price changes at the time of payment.

– It introduces complexity to DAO functionality, increasing reliance on oracles or could introduce unforeseen problems

I agree with avoiding complexity where it isn’t necessary. However, volatility will continue to be a challenge moving forward and it is necessary for the DAO to address it. Not doing so undermines the ability of the DAO to support teams appropriately on the one hand, and to avoid overspending on the other.


I also agree with this proposal, it only makes sense. the price of ckb can fluctuate in a short amount of time.


The following is the Chinese version of the proposal.

[DIS] DAO 的付款使用美元计价,付款日换算成对应的 CKB 数量

以下提案由 Leigh 撰写,由于他现在因家中急事无法参与,所以由我代为发布。


我注意到在 DAO 的流程中,提案的付款方式需要修正。我之前回顾了所有的提案,看看有什么可以改进的地方,我注意到了下面这份提案,如果你之前也不了解,请先阅读:

[DIS] 如果价格波动超过10%,付款时需重新计算CKB数量

这是一个非常严肃的话题,目前 DAO 的财务完整性前景堪忧。我希望这份提案能引发讨论/辩论或达成共识。

我一直以为,当请求用 CKB 进行支付时,付款金额总是等于按照 CKB 当天价格计算出来的金额。但我了解到的事实并非如此。


例子 1:

当 John 去另一个国家的餐馆用餐,在付款时,他不会用昨天的汇率支付餐费,也不会用明天的汇率支付餐费,他会用今天的汇率支付今天的这顿餐费,因为这才是吃饭时需要支付的金额。

但 CKB Community Fund DAO 的情况有所不同。根据 DAO 的规则,当 3 周过去后,支付的 CKB 数量与最初提议时的数量相同。这不合理。

CKB 和其他加密货币都具有超强的波动性,价格甚至在一天之内就可能经历极端的高低起伏(更不用说 3 周时间了)。

这在本质上要么会支付过多的 CKB(如果价格在此期间快速上涨),要么会支付过少的 CKB(如果价格下跌)。这对那些希望获得稳定资金以维持项目并将其进行到底的潜在项目来说是个坏消息。我们需要为社区认可的项目提供更好的稳定性。



所以我的建议是,提案中只写法币(USD)的金额,在每次付款当天,根据 CKB 在 CoinMarketCap 上的开盘价,将其转换为对应数量的 CKB。然后,就可以将转换好的 CKB 数量发给收款人,收款人/项目方可以自行决定是否立即将其兑换成稳定的货币。就像 John 在另一个国家用餐时,按照当天的汇率支付餐费。


例子 2:

“John 的项目” 请求 3 万美元/法定货币的赞助,这份提案由社区投票并最终确定分 3 个阶段进行支付,

第 1 阶段支付等值 1万美元的 CKB,付款当天 CKB 在 CoinMarketCap 上的开盘价是 0.01 美元,所以需要支付 1,000,000 CKB。

3 个月后支付第二阶段的款项,但此时 CKB 的价格是 0.02 美元,因此只需支付 500,000 CKB。

又过了 3 个月,要支付第三阶段的款项,而 CKB 的价格已跌至 0.005 美元,因此需要支付 2,000,000 CKB。

对于 “John 的项目” 和 CKB Community Fund DAO 来说,我看不出还有什么其他方法能比这种付款方式更有效。

不幸的是,在现实生活中,加密货币和 CKB 并不是高效的支付方式,尤其是在时间不断流逝的情况下。


这份提案将适用于未来所有的 DAO 付款,同时也适用于之前那些还有未支付款项的提案,前提是他们同意这一新规则。



Je suis entièrement d’accord avec cette proposition.


Thanks @Yeti for ping me.

The primary goal of the CKB Community Fund DAO is to provide a community-driven way to fund projects within the CKB ecosystem, ultimately fostering its growth. This is its most important objective.

We also considered some secondary goals, such as using the governance of the CKB Community Fund DAO as a real-world experiment for future Nervos governance, and finding a governance model that is both simple and sufficient. However, these are just secondary considerations.

The design principle of the CKB Community Fund DAO is simplicity, entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily.

The issues mentioned in the post were actually anticipated from the beginning, as similar problems arise frequently in my work. I spent a lot of time considering whether to introduce the concept of fiat currency in the first version. However, I decided to keep it simple. Introducing fiat currency would bring additional complexities, such as exchange rates, where to find these rates, whose rates to trust, and whether prices should be optional in fiat or CKB.

Ultimately, we maintained the simplicity of the initial version’s rules and left the remaining questions to the community.

Rather than being opposed to the proposal last time, I wanted everyone to thoroughly consider the implications of adding such complexity. Can we really not use CKB as the standard? Can’t we address this by adding a supplementary proposal to request more CKB?

The previous proposal did not pass, and now a similar proposal is up for vote again. It seems my goal of making everyone think twice has been achieved. At heart, I am a pragmatist—solving real problems is my priority. If a similar proposal comes up this time, I will support it.

Additionally, I have a suggestion for the proposers. If you want similar proposals to pass, ensure that previous passed proposals are given the choice to opt-in. New regulations should not affect the interests of those who have already passed proposals. At the very least, specify how to handle these parts.

I wish the proposal success, and I will cast my supportive vote as a community member.

Keep rocking, guys!

CKB Community Fund DAO 的初衷是希望有一种社区自治的方式资助社区项目的方式,从而更有利于发展 CKB 生态,这是他最重要的目标。

当然,我们当时也想到了一些次要目标,比如可以把 CKB Community Fund DAO 的治理作为未来 Nervos 未来治理的一场真实的试验; 以及是否可以找到一个既简洁又够用的治理规则。但注意,这只是一些次要目标。

另外,CKB Community Fund DAO 当时的设计原则浓缩起来就只有一点,就是简洁,即如无必要,勿增实体。

这个文章提到的问题我在最初的时候其实就想到了,这其实是很自然容易想到的,因为类似的问题在我的工作中天天都会发生。所以我花了很长时间思考是不是要直接在第一个版本引入法币的概念。但最后我还是选择了 keep it simple. 法币一个概念的引入将会引入更多的概念,比如兑换价格,以及查询兑换价格的地方,以谁的价格为准,甚至法币计价和 ckb 计价是不是要可选等等。


与其说我上次投反对票是真心反对这个提案,不如说我是希望大家在引入这样一个复杂度时再三思。我们真的不能用 CKB 记价吗?它真的不能通过一个类似附加提案补充申请更多 CKB 来解决吗?




Keep rocking guys!


Thanks Terry, I’m sure everyone here appreciates your insights into this and your thought process when designing the DAO.

How this would work with a proper on-chain governance system was something I hadn’t even thought about until you brought it up last time, so these things are important we are all aware of and will be something that’s going to have to get dealt with again in the future.


I am also supporting this as well


This is a no brainer. You have to have a sustainable model in place for volitile crypto market conditions.


Definitely agree on this. We need this in the Nervos Network Community and Blockchain!!

1 Like

Agree as well!

1 Like

Very good point here!

Erase volatility from market related to ckb price / timings.

Its totally a yes from me

1 Like

yes I agree

1 Like