The dCompass project is getting closer to the alpha release (exact date TBD at Schelling point).
Here is an overview of the dCompass product release plan.
Mid season 14 - Alpha version: testnet environment, not audited
Late Season 15 - Beta release: mainnet and L2 deployment, audited
Season 16: DAO and token launch.
We have about 6 months of development in the backlog to get the MVP deployed in production.
We are currently in the pre-alpha stage and want to maximize the chances of a successful release by collaborating with MMM on the product marketing strategy.
We will also use this time to establish partnerships and create walkthroughs and quests ahead of time so that we have a decent amount of projects and quests to explore for the beta.
Assuming everything goes as planned, we’d like to redouble our efforts to provide the best possible experience for adventurers and develop more custom quest types. That means hiring talented builders, designers, marketers and having a higher cashflow.
So here’s an open question for stewards and Gitcoin community members, post Season 15, what would be your preferred path for funding and continuing our project? Vote and let us now in the comments if you have other ideas !
- Seed round, Series A,…
- Gitcoin DAO funding & other grants
- Token release and token swaps
So just to clarify that would mean two more seasons of Gitcoin DAO funding? (S14 & S15)
If the plan is to fully be funded for two more rounds by Gitcoin, would you be willing to deeply integrate in the DAO?
Top of mind for me is that there seems to be no integration into the DAO.
We are currently having strategic worksessions on objectives where we try to align as much as possible and crosspolinate, Dcompass has not participated in these although invited.
You created your own Discord without any dialogue with the rest of the DAO.
For me it is not entirely clear how Dcompass ties into the mission of Gitcoin.
For this last point this has more to do with the work we need to do on the overall mission of the DAO rather than anything else, but it is an important point.
How can Stewards justify funding a project for two more seasons that is not deeply tied into the mission & overall workings of the DAO? Do you see possible solutions/improvements here?
I don’t think this is true. Three of the FDD S13 outcomes include building quests for onboarding contributors to specific jobs and/or for FDD itself on dCompass Quests. We were proactive about working with them and might have put them near capacity.
I’m guessing in the same way that they funded DeveloperDAO, PrimeDAO, and are about to do with Wonder. Unlike those, this project started as a response to @owocki RFP request for someone to decentralize Gitcoin’s quests product.
It is by nature part of Gitcoin’s mission.
An open-source digital infrastructure for anyone to share knowledge and for communities to attest to someone learning seems pretty aligned with our mission.
This is a little one-sided. dCompass has not been given the seat at all times in the past. We have been learning on both sides of this relationship. I do not see their Discord as a defection because we have never made that explicit. Unless we explicitly define the “structured” vs “unstructured” workstream policy, this is an unfair accusation.
To be fair, I do feel that your points are valid @krrisis. I think the issues which arose were a normal response from a dedicated, but rational team. I have felt that while dCompass has not been given clear guidance as to how the processes work. We have been learning with them and should be thankful that they are carving the path.
We simply weren’t ready for a person as exceptional as Hux, or a projects as ready for primetime as dCompass to emerge from GitcoinDAO.
I’m defending him because I think this information is critical for stewards to properly gauge the situation in addition to being very supportive of his project.
Thanks for your feedback @krrisis!
Yes we didn’t participate in those meetings but I’d like to highlight that we are a small product workstream and we’re at a critical stage which is the release.
So we have priorities and unfortunately we weren’t able to stretch ourselves between the DAO workshops and our internal operations.
I’d be happy to improve our organization for next seasons to have more collaboration and communication with other workstreams.
Our team had a Discord even before working on the decentralization of quests, we’ve just moved over a new one to reflect the dCompass product.
Most of the contributors are also from Gitcoin so there is communication with “the rest of the DAO”.
We are decentralizing the Gitcoin quests feature, which aims to educate people on Web3 projects and technologies. We will also provide incentives to learn and build up a portfolio just by completing quests.
Our goal is to release an MVP that will not only contain quizzes but also code challenges, attending hackathons, voting on proposals, etc.
So it is pretty clear to me that incentivizing Web3 education and onboarding is a digital public good that will promote legitimate projects in the industry.
Not to mention our constant efforts to use decentralized technologies and build a suistanable open-source software.
I see a very subjective opinion, I would rather ask, what would stop stewards funding a project that could be even bigger than a platform like RabbitHole or coinbase earn ?
I see improvements on collaboration and communication for sure.
What could be great is to probably do a mix of VC + Token Swap while remaining with GitcoinDAO and using this project for the community around GitcoinDAO in first. At this point you guys are ready to scale up and I don’t think to redo this conversation in 3 or 6 months is the right way to go, following the conversation we had during the SC meeting you might want to meet with @kyle and see what kind of business plan we can think off then move on the next step (This can be done in the next few days I guess to not block your progression) I would like to have a dedicated “free” plan for us “Public Goods” to compete with LinkedIn for example while still owning our data.
Hi Hux, can you comment on whether the above success criteria from the season 13 proposal were met? If not, should the stewards have confidence that your new success criteria will be met?
If GitcoinDAO continues to allocate GTC (governance rights) to dCompass, will it receive governance rights in an eventual dCompass DAO? What amount? Does this amount differ if dCompass is given more GTC in S14/S15?
I have to admit that I’ve overcomitted by announcing an MVP deployed in production by the end of this month.
Even though our S13 roadmap goals are mostly achieved and we could deploy our contracts on mainnet and Polygon instead of using testnets like Rinkeby on this staging app, but that would be risky because we haven’t been audited yet.
That being said, we are confident that the KPIs will be reached once our contracts will be audited & deployed on mainnet. For season 14 we’ll focus on user testing as well as creating partnerships and content before the production release.
Yes Gitcoin DAO should have a say in the governance of the dCompass DAO. Gitcoin is the biggest funder so far and it makes sense if it’s one of the main governing entity of the dCompass DAO.
I’m open to negotiate regarding the amount but we can offer 2 seats in our council, which is currently a 3/5 multisig that we can update to be 5/8 so by owning 2 seats, Gitcoin DAO would have 25% of the governance rights.
If Gitcoin DAO continues to fund us (through GTC or any other token), we’re open to make a mutual grant agreement to make a swap between GTC and the DCOMP token for a maximum of 5% of our total supply.