[EP4.9][Social] Select providers for EP4.7 streams

Status Passed
Discussion Thread Discuss
Votes Passed on Snapshot

Abstract

Following the approval of EP4.7 by the DAO, prospective service providers have submitted applications to be considered by the DAO for funding. This proposal collects successful applications for a vote by the DAO.

Specification

EP4.7 provides for a budget of $3,600,000 USDC to be provided annually to qualifying service providers. All successful applications are summarized below in random order.

The purpose of this vote is to select service providers to receive streaming funding from the DAO. Per the draft rules, selection of winning proposals uses the following process:

  1. Order Proposals

    • Arrange all proposals in descending order based on the number of votes received.
  2. Evaluate Proposals Sequentially

    • Vote Threshold Check
      • If a proposal has received fewer than 1 million votes, stop the evaluation process immediately.
    • Comparison with ‘None of the Above’
      • If a proposal has fewer votes than the ‘None of the Above’ option, stop the evaluation process.
    • Budget Check
      • If a proposal’s requested budget exceeds the remaining budget, skip it and move to the next proposal.
    • Selection
      • If a proposal passes the above checks, add it to the set of selected proposals. Deduct its requested budget from the remaining budget.

Post-Selection Procedure

  • If at least one service provider is chosen, the Meta-Governance working group will post an executable vote to implement the funding streams by January 10 at the latest.

Instructions

Vote FOR on any service providers whom you believe that are capable of continuous evolution and enhancement of the ENS system and for which you believe offer a good cost benefit. Do NOT vote to any provider you do not believe to be capable of such, for which you believe the proposed projects are out of scope or for which you believe the ask is too high for the proposals. Only vote “None of the Above” if you want to express your disapproval with the whole system and would rather not have ANY of the projects be selected.

Candidates:

NameSys.eth

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $200,000 p.a.


handle.eth

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $100,000 p.a.


NameHash Labs

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $600,000 p.a.


Unruggable

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $400,000 p.a.


generalmagic.eth & pairwise.eth

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $300,000 p.a.


servais.eth / web3xplorer.com

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $100,000 p.a.


AlphaWallet

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $100,000 p.a.


ENS Like Protocol

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $100,000 p.a.


Namespace

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $200,000 p.a.


Gnosis Guild

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $600,000 p.a.


GravityDAO

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $100,000 p.a.


ENS Vision Forge

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $500,000 p.a.


Blockful

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $300,000 p.a.


Web3Domains.com

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $500,000 p.a.


dAppling

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $400,000 p.a.


ESF Tools

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $200,000 p.a.


StableLab

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $300,000 p.a.


The Interceptor

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $500,000 p.a.


Tally

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $300,000 p.a.


ENS Anti-Abuse Tools

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $100,000 p.a.


Wildcard Labs

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $200,000 p.a.


eth.limo

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $500,000 p.a.


wayback-machine.eth

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $200,000 p.a.


Referrals powered by generalmagic.eth

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $200,000 p.a.


unicorn.eth

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $200,000 p.a.


Ethereum Follow Protocol

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $500,000 p.a.


resolverworks.eth

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $700,000 p.a.


1w3.eth

Summary | Full Proposal
Requested Budget: $500,000 p.a.


17 Likes

I’ve marked the post above as a community wiki; applicants are welcome to make corrections and changes to their summary paragraphs. Please observe a length limit of 1000 characters for summaries.

1 Like

I’m curious if there will be ANY “curation”, or preliminary assessment of these proposals by the Meta-Gov WG prior to the vote?

For example, does the project fit within the goals of the Stream? does the proposal break new ground or duplicate other projects? (Just possible examples, I’m not saying these should be in an assessment)

Are funding requests all-or-nothing, or can they be partially funded?

Tom

1 Like

The proposals in this list are all those that meet the requirements as laid out in the rules. The MG WG has decided not to exclude any proposals on the basis of subjective criteria; it’s up to voters to decide if projects should qualify or not.

Funding requests are all-or-nothing.

2 Likes

thanks for clarifying.

@nick.eth I’m confused, I thought $3.6m/yr is what won the Snapshot vote. What am I missing?

1 Like

Can we disambiguate the 2 General Magic Proposals?

Maybe the first one can be

generalmagic.eth & pairwise.eth

and the second one can be

Referrals powered by generalmagic.eth

:-)?

1 Like

Good catch, fixed.

Feel free to edit as you see fit!

1 Like

Tagging all involved parties so they can have an opportunity to review:

@ethlimo.eth
@premm.eth
@NameSys
@viniciusbedum
@hidayath.eth
@MaximeServais
@Killari
@hodl.esf.eth
@bobjiang
@brantlymillegan
@Zimtente
@cap
@encirca
@russell
@Raphael_StableLab
@slobo.eth
@stevegachau.eth
@juankbell.eth
@garypalmerjr
@sem
@enspunks.eth
@Zeptimus
@coolhorsegirl
@auryn
@aabugosh
@griff
@maxi.eth
@alextnetto.eth
@lightwalker.eth

6 Likes

Hey, Can you modify The Interceptors text to (994 characters):
"
The Interceptor is an open source browser extension for Chrome, Firefox and Brave.

The Interceptor provides users with a comprehensive explanation of their transactions before they sign them. The Interceptor counteracts scammers by simulating fraudulent transactions, thereby exposing the scam to users. As an example, there are deceptive pages falsely asserting that your ENS name is set to expire tomorrow (which is untrue!). When the user attempts to extend, the application instead initiates a transaction designed to purloin assets from their account. Our tool simulates this scenario, revealing that the proposed transaction is clearly divergent from what the app presented to the user.

The Interceptors core features are:

  • Transaction simulation
  • Account spoofing (anyone can be vitalik.eth!)
  • Simulation stack (simulate multiple transactions in row without sending them to network)
  • Open source, censorship resistant and privacy protective (we also deveolop out in open)

"

Thank you!

The post is a public wiki; please feel free to make edits to your own entry as you see fit.

1 Like

Edited. Thank you :pray:

Gx! :slight_smile: Sorry, to bother, I’m just a bit confused. I was tagged as an individual on the post, but I’m not seeing my proposal on the list (Gravity DAO). I’d like to know if there is something I could do for my proposal or if the discussion will be just around the projects that already appear on the list. Thanks!

GravityDAO was not included because you did not provide an endorsement of at least 10k votes by the deadline.

Edit: I see Griff endorsed you on a separate thread, but this wasn’t reflected in the application post. I’ll add you to the list of candidates.

For the convenience of Voters I reformatted the full proposals as a PDF

I removed this file as I think the layout I was suboptimal.

6 Likes

We will be preparing the proposal in the next few hours, so if any teams wants to make any changes to their one line summary, please do ASAP!

2 Likes

Ran into a technical issue: Snapshot only allows a max text size of 10K chars, while the current text is over 17k long. To reduce that much, here’s a draft of what that text might look like:

While I think the abbreviated text does get the gist of the proposals, a lot of nuance is lost. So the next best choice would be to have the proposal without any candidate summary and link that on an external webpage, which then links to the full proposal.

3 Likes

Voting has now closed. The following providers will be funded:

  • eth.limo: $500,000
  • NameHash Labs: $600,000
  • resolverworks.eth: $700,000
  • Blockful: $300,000
  • Unruggable: $400,000
  • Wildcard Labs: $200,000
  • Ethereum Follow Protocol: $500,000
  • Namespace: $200,000
  • unicorn.eth: $200,000

Total: $3,600,000

An executable proposal to fund these providers using a streaming platform will follow in the next voting window on January 10.

3 Likes

Typo – Namespace: $200,000

Congrats to all those receiving funding!

4 Likes