February 16th, 2023
Agenda
A) General DAO News
B) Looking at Retroactive Public Goods Funding model with w/Jonas.
C) February Small Grants Update
E) Open space for additional topics or comments
Please reach out to @Coltron.eth, @AvsA, or @vegayp if you would like to present a topic or be added to the agenda.
Minutes
Transcribed by @estmcmxci and edited by @coltron.eth
Attendees: hellenstans.eth, vegayp.eth, Jonas Seiferth, avsa.eth, accessor.eth, gregskril.eth, coltron.eth, estmcmxci.eth, 5pence.eth
A) General DAO News
- The ENS Public Goods working group will be co-sponsoring Schelling Point, an event focusing on Public Goods talks, at ETHDenver.
- There will be two ENS meet-up events hosted on March 2nd.
- ENS Ecosystem Small Grants submissions close tomorrow.
- No active proposals.
B) Retroactive Public Goods Funding Model
Jonas Seiferth @ Optimism spoke on retroactive funding models. He gave a retrospective on their last funding round:
Retro PGF2 Summary:
They intended to prop up infra in Optimism and the greater Ethereum ecosystem to create a Public Goods marketplace. The goal is to develop the property of having incentives and a good funding structure to build public goods. As a DAO, Optimism observes what impact has already been generated… not evaluating what projects will make an impact in the future.
The first part is to offer a scope of public goods funding. Here, they essentially build social consensus on what should be funded in the future; for this round, they want to fund public goods built around the Optimism stack. For future rounds, they can create categories like infra, tooling, utilities, education, and more.
This first step is essential before the payout of the round, it sets the expectation for people who want to contribute and for rewards in the future. Afterward, community nominations set the stage for funding. People can nominate projects on the forum for retro public goods funding. They require projects to opt-in to the program, verify identity, get wallet 0x, and share more about the project’s story and the impact it’s generated.
Badge holders selected by Optimism community members are tasked with voting for the funding round. Each badge holder then shares how they should distribute the funds in each round.
Optimism have a two-house gov system; token-house (roles: grants, protocol parameters) , and citizens-house (represent users of optimism protocol, pgf, dao gov representation). The Citizen house will vote on adding new citizens to its membership; tjey will have joint responsibility of two houses.
hellenstans.eth: how we badge holders selected?
Prior participants were selected; people were elected to be badge holders; badge holders can nominate badge holders. For future rounds: pre-announce the scope. It will give them enough time to build specifically for the public goods round to help create an expectation of retroactive awards. Simplifying the sign-up process is important.
If you’re a badge holder, your role is to evaluate how much impact the nominated projects have had in the ecosystem.
Future rounds: projects will sign-up directly if they fall into the scope.
Insights: public nominations encourage community signal; what we found however, we received project spamming, people creating new accounts and nominating their projects… the community signal became meaningless. we want to do project sign-up and we want to do attestations as a solution.
Resources:
C) February Small Grants Update
- Public Goods Small Grants will go live tomorrow at 9am ET.
- Submissions will be accepted until 02/24.
- Voting will be active until 02/28.
Attendees discussed how to improve ensgrants.xyz application process. Key takeways:
- Reduce friction for continual submissions.
- Focus on one continuous round where grants stay active for a period of time.
- Solidify cadence to set expections.
A telegram for technical implementations was created.