Review New Incentives Draft

Feedback from the community on the draft of new rules system (https://gist.github.com/bwhm/261c1ca9d9a23b29970755e5f4ab1919). Analysis and Review.
Some statistic:
A total of 17 people took part in the survey. Of these, 10 are consuls. Percentage of correct answers: 80.54%
The errors are all different, but mostly not critical for using the new system (for example, they indicate one of the reasons for introducing a new KPI system - not enough KPIs for all the members). In general, there is an understanding of the new system and everyone likes it.
Processed response table: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15iFpWKGEjd_7fNqvv1Uq-COD4krR1m86/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=115293042971911957605&rtpof=true&sd=true

What do you like the most from the draft?

Workgroup system and the fact that JOYtask can be booked through pioneer
Expanding the number of working groups, in particular there will be a group with a strong marketing focus
Control over budget allocation
Many groups will appear and the fact that ordinary members can take tasks
Building a reputation system

System is very difficult to understand. It takes time to understand the system
The active community is still rather small, so there may some overlap between the council/WG leads, etc. (conflict of interest)
The entry threshold does not seem to decrease.
OP-G will have more management instruments then a council

The number of seats in each working group. Will the recruitment be carried out from scratch or will the people who are now jump to the same +- positions as they were?
Will Council JOYtasks also be assigned by JOYtask Manager? Also, conflicts may arise, whom to choose as assignee.
Council specific JOYtasks - "Create JOYtasks (CMs can't participate)" - CM participate in creation of JOYtasks, which CM can't fulfil, right? But why can't they participate in creation of JOYtasks for CMs as well?
"They will be managed and CREATED by a new Working Group, the Operations Group Gamma." - this sentence is unclear to me. It contradicts point one of this paragraph "These will be CREATED by JSGenesis, in a collaborative process with the Council and group Leads."
What is meant by "reputation"? will it be measured somehow or is it an abstract concept?
The idea here is that now we will not have separate budgets for the Council and for the KPIs, but instead we will have one “unified” budget. Is that correct? Interesting to know what will be approximate %% allocation between JOYtasks/ Working Groups/ Other spending? Who else will be able to earn a significant "income"?
Who is responsible for strategy, strategy development? Rule the whole ship? Strategy & development department?

Create A Joystream Reserve Fund. This fund will have to collect the remaining funds during the work of the council. The amount of funds allocated to the fund is not so important, the main thing is that it exists and stimulates savings and competent allocation of budget funds. The funds collected in the fund cannot be withdrawn to close the holes in the council's budget, JOY must be strictly allocated to rewards for new users for various kinds of mini-bounties (challenges). Challenges should be invented at least once a month and their purpose is to increase the activity of the current young audience and help in the development of the project, as well as the search for new participants.
We should create some system to improve the work of operations alpha. I mean that now (and in the new system) council doesn't track their work. CMs don't see the whole picture of their work, it's unclear. and they don't understand why is this group is so expensive. We need to show it to them in some way. But I don't know in which way for now.
create gamma openings like we discussed for the KPI website.
Highlights comments from 0x2bc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cY43ZqB2DEmWPRBTs6utAXylXDx8fBTbCUpS_D1oD9o/edit