Is it possible to freeze the service and then restart it again after the project has grown in size?

I consider the cost of 5,000USD to be quite high for the current project size.

I will change my vote depending on your response.
I am sorry for your time, but thank you in advance for your patience.

Hello wdBy...aFCn,

perhaps there is a misunderstanding here. The work was completed and the team signed it off, there was a vote about it already and both milestones were paid. However, the INTR paid out was not worth as much anymore when the referendum paid out. 

I agree it's fair to question value for money, but in this case the referendum is only about making us whole for the INTR depreciation. Were this vote not to go through, people in a similar situation may be more hesitant to provide services or agree to be paid in INTR. 

Matías



[@wd8Q...Hfvt](wd8Qm97FZTbM8MTTTkRKFrrgkZupQsPWNwEeEmBRSf1GoHfvt-interlay) 
Thank you for taking the time to answer.
I have changed my vote.

Video analysis here:
https://www.loom.com/share/c9a83b7285024e50b6317e8ec0da098e?sid=a2f4f5ec-aa71-4ff2-a22f-ab23e55741d1

Thank you wdBy...aFCn for revoting in favor. That also gives me a new test case for the analysis software :)

I would hope that people take the time and explain their vote. 
Caron and I did quite a bit of work, and it's a bit demotivating to see the nay votes piling up without a justification. The use of the word "community" seems a bit misplaced, because in a community you communicate...
Indeed the only person providing details was voting under false pretenses, and they reversed their vote later. Why did the others vote NAY? One party even went to great lengths to vote using 3 wallets (at least timestamps suggest this)

Hi
I'm sorry I'm not sure I quite get it
Initial RFP says Milestone 1: (3000 USD worth of INTR), Milestone 2: (2000 USD worth of INTR)
I see from the two milestone payments that this has been achieved by doing an average the last 7 days the day of submission of the proposal for the milestone, which to me seems like a fair approach.
You are saying that you have been underpaid because you are looking at the average price the day of execution which in this case decreased between the two dates.
Did I understand correctly?

To me, considering using the last 7 days average the date of submission is the best approach possible (as we cannot obviously anticipate the price of the days of execution), it has to be the one that is done.
What I would suggest is that for any future RFP that is clearly stated so that the people taking on the job know it.

Here I am a bit embarrassed as I understand your request but:
- it is a never ending story, are you going to make another request to compensate for when you will get the 75k INTR and price has dropped again before execution? A malicious actor in your position could even drop his bag the day of execution to then ask more INTR to compensate
- would you have given back the INTR if the price would have gone the other way around?
For these two questions/reasons, I think the better is to keep to the rule that the price that applies is the 7 day average the day of submission of the proposal.

Happy to receive your feedback



[@wd9B...grYv](wd9Bhr45eqyRQYQawtjK1J8VALNcvmiHyygikosYqHWL8grYv-interlay) 
Thank you for taking the time to explain your vote, your arguments are perfectly reasonable.
We would not have bothered to go through this exercise for a small deviation (say, 5%), but felt the deviation was so large (around 20%) that it warranted this. I have seen other parties reclaim such slippage (on Dotsama) so I thought it was fair.

If I didn't have a day job, too, I am not sure I would commit to such a deal again (hard work for not so hard INTR). Payment takes for ever, is uncertain, and potentially much lower than expected. 

[@wdB8...Ck9c](wdB8cwiTrvAUMtGrkxi1GBTJ1ShXEcFB3wbmSACSLsfwWCk9c-interlay) 
Thanks for your feedback. So you know I actually didn't vote, on the one hand I feel sorry for you and totally understand your position, on the other hand I am not so sure it is a safe way to manage these situations (overall).

Considering this would potentially lead to you (or someone in your position) not take future jobs in these conditions, I think something has to change in the way these RFPs are done.
Would it be possible that when the RFP is submitted and executed, the amount of INTR from the treasury is swapped for USDT from the pools to make the payment for the job a fixed price in USDT?

Exact!
Sometimes the innocent pay, unfairly.
But on the other hand, the sector is full of malicious agents.


Payment Details:
Beneficiary Address: 5CyarovBr8e3uAauvGH7MhmT8wQPZ5W3eCEwM1fHoHf9LapE

Milestone funding size: 5000 USD worth of INTR (reference only)
Amount to make up for exchange rate difference: 75466 $INTR ( <--- this is what we are asking for)

Details:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OMYNLSyRi3Jwm3INzCi-4Gf1l1O9tVordzEU3uNqrRE/edit?usp=sharing

Caron and Matías are trying to recover the difference between the grant amount and the value of the INTR that was eventually paid out. 

We are providing as evidence the median price of INTR in the relevant weeks as follows:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/16duJk-hP6IloCJEy0BCPM29A6t50eth3pjSlW3kn9Kk/edit?usp=sharing

We politely request support by the Interlay community. 


Recover Underpayments for Grant Work