Decentralizing Gitcoin Holdings (now web3event.co)'s Work within GitcoinDAO

With the news that Gitcoin Holdings is Passing the Torch, I wanted to start a thread about decentralizing the work that Gitcoin Holdings does which may be more appropriate for the DAO post transition.

First things first, we are renaming Gitcoin Holdings to web3event.co soon. We are making this move to make explicit our renewed focus on Virtual Events + to disambiguate with any Gitcoin related activity (henceforth it should be assumed that the brand Gitcoin refers to the DAO) TLDR henceforth in this post I will refer to this entity as web3event.co + would encourage you all to make the vocabulary update ASAP too…

I will now list off the things that I’m aware that web3event.co does for the DAO. People from the DAO should feel free to (1) list off the work that they know of & (2) pick up or not pick up that work - up to you.

Ideally this thread becomes a schelling point for the proactive communication about the transfer of said work.

Big Stuff

(as of July 5 2022)

  1. Building Grants 2.0 [moving to GPC workstream]
  2. Maintaining Gitcoin Grants 1.0 [moving to GPC workstream]

Minor Stuff

(as of July 5 2022)

  1. I administer the gitcoindao.com server [anyone want this?]
  2. I update the TLDR - What is Gitcoin? 🤖 [Aug 2022] post monthly. [anyone want this?]
  3. We have maintained the ENS/DNS for Gitcoin related activities [moving to Gitcoin Foundation]
  4. We have maintained several SAAS tools (AWS, sentry, fingerprint.js, notion, etc) for the DAO [moving to Gitcoin Foundation]
  5. Hosting DAOVibes weekly [moving to DAO public speaker group]
  6. I host a quarterly podcast episode about Gitcoin Grants (here is the most recent one). [unknown, i suppose I could still do this, just as an outsider looking in?]
  7. Probably other stuff, list it below if you are aware of something not listed.

How should web3event.co team members show up in DAO-native spaces ?

The line that we set up in Passing the Torch 🔥 was that web3event.co team members would be disaffiliating from “leadership” in the DAO. This means that they’re not running any of the spaces or core projects of the DAO, but they are still welcome to show up in these spaces in a social or advisory capacity.

I am open to feedback on the above.

Its so cool to look back on the progress that has already been made on this front. In GR14 I was not really operationally involved in the round at all. How far we’ve come from the days of GR6-GR10 where holdings ran the whole show! Kudos everyone!

1 Like

I think this can go to DAO tooling, so that would be @puncar-dev, if he agrees.

Checking in with the team on point 2.

Yes, please.

I hope you will play a crucial role in an advisory capacity, if we can’t get your full leadership (for now?) I hope we can source your insightful thought leadership as often as possible.

i think its important that the dao has no ceo and i definitely dont want to act in that capacity, whether in substance or optically, to the dao. i am bullish on the CSDO + p2p feedback across workstream leaders/stewards being the decentralized equivilent of an executive function for the DAO

maybe its worth unbundling what you find useful from “full leadership” from me? of what a crucial advisor role looks like?

im happy to continue sensemaking for example. whether it’s appropriate for me to do that here on the gov forums or on the greenpill pod or on twitter is up for debate tho.

With full leadership I definitely don’t mean full leadership of the entire DAO, this would undo us being a DAO, so fully and deeply agree.

With ‘full leadership’ I mainly meant taking up ‘a’ position of full-time leader in the DAO (in a workstream) at some point in the future.

An advisory role could be being a part of the CSDO calls (tactical & strategy) and weighing in on topics. This would not make you a key decision maker but the DAO would benefit from your acquired experience as founder of Gitcoin plus web3/DAO thought leader.

Yes, I think we should have that under DAO tooling. @owocki will connect with you on how to do the transfer.

perhaps the CSDO could come to a group consensus about how they’d like me/holdings involved in the coming weeks + then we can work it forward from there?

1 Like

hey kris, i just wrote up a thought leadership post here: Circuits - a Modular/Scalable Way to build GTC Utility

This is the first one of these I’ve done since disaffiliation from leadership.

I am curious to get yours and others feedback about whether my post here is appropriate or not. Does sensemaking + writing about it qualify as leadership? Does the DAO want me to continue or discontinue writing posts like this?

1 Like

I can only speak for myself but I deeply hope you will continue writing posts like these.
Most of the workstream leads clearly don’t have enough bandwidth to take a step back and think about GTC utility let alone make it all happen. So yes, for me this is very relevant and useful, will link this post in the CSDO notes to hopefully get some more feedback/input here.

while were at it, one question to ask may be: what other strategic questions/design spaces would you like to see posts on?

Me and @umarkhaneth are doing weekly, yearly newsletters and reviews.

We can make sure this stays updated on a monthly basis as well.

Hi all. Just checking in here.

I’ve been trying to find the right engagement cadence (mostly just being there if ppl need me, but not pushing any agenda or leading anything) for the last month.

The one thing I did do more proactively is author this post knowledge transferring what I know about the sybil resistence domain.

If you have any feedback, let me know.

1 Like

I wholeheartedly echo @krrisis’ perspective — I find your thought leadership posts to be incredibly helpful, especially on topics that are crucial to DAO progress. I can’t speak to the legal specifics, but sharing your ideas on our most important challenges definitely feels like something a node in the network should be able to do.

1 Like