Voting Report: coltron.eth
Summary
This post outlines my rationale for voting in the service provider selection. The primary factors I considered were:
- Capable of continuous evolution and enhancement of the ENS system; and
- Offer a good cost-benefit; and
- Have a majority focus and dedication toward improving the Ethereum Name Service protocol or system.
The first two points above were taken from the instructions announcing EP 4.9.
I concede that even with these instructions, this assessment is weighted toward my subjective opinion as a delegate. It was challenging to ascribe an objective, uniform rubric for assessing the many qualified proposals.
Assessing from a cost-benefit perspective was nearly impossible. The size of the service provider request alone was insufficient as a metric for determining possible value. I tried to avoid a knee-jerk reaction on solely the amount requested and looked at the technicality, team size, and how fully committed the teams were as service providers. Cost per team member was a helpful starting point. In some cases, the costs were extremely high in the smaller teams, but these may be more technical roles. There were also varying levels of commitment for the teams as a service provider. The dedication ranged from financial incentive that implied they would be less than part-time committed, while others explicitly stated they were fully committed to the role.
An additional challenge was that these service provider nominations were not required to have promised deliverables. This is a possible critical failure of the process. I recommend that the selected providers lock in at least some explicit goals. We need them to be able to assess success when, in one year, we inevitably discuss renewals. The time for this is before we disburse payments.
Overall, I’m excited that this program exists. Still, I would reduce any haste that may be present, as expressed by other delegates, and take the time to onboard these service providers intentionally.
Support
Listed alphabetically, the following service providers are those that I express support for and would like to succeed in their nominations:
Blockful
- Requested Budget: $300k
- Rationale: I would like to see more work focused on contract-level and developer-related improvements. Blockful is a relatively newer team, but Alex Netto has been involved in the community, and I believe he understands the needs of ENS. Further, I trust that he will provide value for the amount requested.
eth.limo
- Requested Budget: $500k
- Rationale: This team has been enabling the eth.limo gateway operation since 2021. This service has helped provide valuable functionality to the ENS system, and I would like to see this continued formally. They have an impressive track record of continuously delivering improvements.
Namehash
- Requested Budget: $600k
- Rationale: I have only recently become aware of Namehash. This is a strong support because they are 100% focused on improving Ethereum Name Service. I would like to see them continue developing Name Gaurd, which helps provide in-app alerts for malicious name interactions and develop a method for ENS referrals.
Resolverworks
- Requested Budget: $700k
- Rationale: We need a more diverse availability of front-ends to register, manage, and interact with ENS domains, specifically sub-domains. This nomination has a high ask, but considering the scope of full-time work, team needs, and @slobo’s ability to manage and deliver, I am confident that this Service Provider selection will be valuable to the ENS System. @slobo has been an invaluable and dedicated individual seeking to improve ENS.
Unruggable
- Requested Budget: $400k
- Rationale: Premm’s past contributions have already been highly praised, and I would like to see him onboarded as a formal service provider. His dedication to ENS and technical insight have been valuable in the past, and he should be actively supportive moving forward. I want Premm and his team to continue his AA and L2 work and support protocol-level contributions.
Wildcard Labs
- Requested Budget: $200k
- Rationale: This team is promising both increasing adoption and functionality, and has a track record of previous involvement building for ENS. Considering their familiarity with the ENS Ecosystem and it’s needs, and their stated full-time committment they would be a good fit for a service provider stream.
Total Budget Supported: 2.7M
Summary of Selected Providers
| Provider | Request | Team Size | Per Member | Commitment | Other Clients |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blockful | $300,000 | 3 | $100,000 | “Full-time” | Yes |
| eth.limo | $500,000 | 4 | $125,000 | “on call 24/7/365” | Not clear |
| Namehash | $600,000 | 15 | $40,000 | “Day and Night” | No |
| resolverworks.eth | $700,000 | 6 | $116,667 | “Full time” | No |
| Unruggable | $400,000 | 2.5 | $160,000 | “Full-time” | “Exclusively focused” |
| wildcard | $200,000 | 2.5 | $80,000 | “Fully Committed” | Not Clear |
- Note: Part-time Represented as 0.5.
- Note: If team-size provided as range provided, went with highest number.
Not Supported
My basis for exclusions is as follows:
- Amount requested did not match value delivered.
- Building on ENS, but not clearly a service provider. Grant worthy!
- Governance or DAO Tooling work. Grant worthy!
- Data insufficient to make an accurate judgement to allocate >100k USDC for the following year.