GG22 Community Rounds Announced

[MathildaDV]

GG22 Community Rounds Announced

We are thrilled to announce the Community Rounds that have been accepted into GG22! ICYMI, to be eligible to run a community round in GG22 and receive matching funds from Gitcoin, each community needed to upload their proposal to our gov forum by Sept 22.

The GG22 Community Council took 5 days to review and vote on which rounds to accept into the round, and how to allocate matching funds to each. The voting for which rounds to accept was conducted in CharmVerse, and was ranked according to average rubric scores. What changed in GG22? As per the learnings from GG21, it was clear that we needed to increase quality and impact within the rounds we accept into GG rounds. Changes include: Stricter eligibility criteria, and it was up to the council’s discretion how many rounds would be accepted into the round, according to the quality of applications received, including how to allocate matching funds. High-quality rounds with previous round operator experience was essential for GG22.

Rubric that was used is the following:

Round Operators and Team

• Identified Round Operator
  • Clearly identified Round Operator with past experience of running a round?
• Team Members
  • At least two additional team members with previous experience to run a round?

Fundraising

• Matching Pool Impact
  • Matching pool size (that the community is bringing in) is proportional to what they are trying to achieve?

Alignment with one of GG22 Intents

Allo GMV (A round needs to reach 20% crowdfunding proportional to their matching pool. For example, if gitcoin provides $20k in matching the minimum amount of crowdfunding necessary would be $4K), Supporting builders building on top of Allo, Scaling and growing the Ethereum ecosystem

• Mission Alignment
  • Clearly aligns with one of Gitcoin’s GG22 Intents?

Community and Impact

• Community Size and Engagement
• Impact Assessment Plan
  • Detailed plan for assessing grantee impact?

Voting Guidelines:

• Each proposal is to be scored according to the rubric.
• Proposals with the highest average points will be prioritized.
• In case of ties, preference will be given to proposals with stronger alignment with GG22’s Intents and larger community engagement.

Thank you to everyone for applying to this round! It was great to see such a diverse set of applications for GG22.

Thank you to the council @feems, @thedevanshmehta, @ZER8, @wasabi, @mashal, @azeem, @lanzdingz for your engagement and stewarding of this decision.

Results

It was decided by the council that the funds would be split between the Top 7 rounds, with the $125k matching funds from Gitcoin split as follows:

• BioFi Pathfinders - $20k
• Ma Earth Grants Round 2 - $20k
• ENS Ecosystem - $20k
• Allo Builders Advancement Round - $20k
• Growing the Public Gardens - $20k
• Youth in Need - $12.5k
• Regen Citizen Round - $12.5k

We are excited to have these rounds run alongside our OSS Program in GG22!

NOTE: Due to the fact that there was not adequate Round Operator experience within the Planetary Council round, with the only round they ran having had less than 10 donors, and the main funding went to their own project, the round was deemed ineligible to participate within GG22.

As we’re gearing up for GG22, we will contact all round operators to begin the onboarding process for this round!

[wasabi]

Keywords = Diversity & Quality; IMO those were the backbone of the applications to run a Community Round for #GG22.

Super excited with all the proposed rounds, ease of usage of the rubric, and weighted average scoring makes it straightforward.

Best wishes for Rounds Operators and as always a joy to work with the Gitcoin Community Council.

LFG; it’s that time of the year again !

[metahands]

Thanks all, we will work hard to ensure Ma Earth’s Grants Round 2 is impactful and aligned with Gitcoin’s intents, and we appreciate the generosity of matching funds which will go to the grantee land projects.

[SamanthaPower]

Very excited for the first BioFi Round! Hope it is the first of many more to come. We are grateful for the Council giving us a shot to show how GitCoin’s platform can support capital allocation to bioregional organizing teams, BioFi readiness, and later within bioregions.

[mars]

@MathildaDV

NOTE: Due to the fact that there was not adequate Round Operator experience within the Planetary Council round, with the only round they ran having had less than 10 donors, and the main funding went to their own project, the round was deemed ineligible to participate within GG22.

OUCH

That could have been easily resolved if communicated in due time. I was shopping around for advisors, I even updated the application with two extremely powerful people. If only I knew that more experienced operator is needed…

I was pretty sure my experience working with Grants Stack is sufficient, regardles the actual performance of the previous round. If performance is a factor, then the “OR undergo training” clause should be applicabe.

@MathildaDV

1. Team Requirements:

• Identify at least one experienced* Round Operator and at least two partner team members who will act as reviewers or assist in managing the round.
  1. It is mandatory to have at least one Round Operator on your team who has experience in running rounds on Grants Stack (proof to be provided), or to have gone through training (proof to be provided).
  2. If your team has no experienced round operators, you may engage an available experienced round operator from a pool provided by Gitcoin, OR your team needs to undergo training hosted by Gitcoin.

@MathildaDV

Round Operators and Team

• Identified Round Operator
  • Clearly identified Round Operator with past experience of running a round?
• Team Members
  • At least two additional team members with previous experience to run a round?

Anyway, here we are, expressing regret of not receiving feedback about this issue sooner.

[Sov]

Thank you to the Gitcoin community and the GG22 Community Council for supporting the Allo Builders Advancement Round.

As one of the proposers, I’m thrilled that our round has been selected and granted a $20k matching pool. This support demonstrates the community’s commitment to growing the Allo ecosystem and fostering innovation in public goods funding.

On behalf of the Green Pill Dev Guild and the Cartographers, I’m excited to launch this round and contribute to the advancement of the Allo. For those interested in participating or learning more about our round, we’ve prepared the following resources:

1. Eligibility Criteria: Allo Builders Advancement Round Eligibility Criteria - Google Docs
2. Round Information Hub: CharmVerse - The Network for Onchain Communities

We’ll regularly update the Charmverse site with additional information about the round, including application details and FAQs. We encourage potential applicants and community members to check these resources and reach out if they have any questions.

The round will soon be launched on Grants Stack. We are targeting Tuesday (or before) of next week!

Thank you again for this opportunity. We’re looking forward to working with the community to make this round a success and drive Allo’s growth.

Sov

[mars]

Unsolicited advice

Telegram group

Each round operator without existing Telegram group should establish one.

A single group OR dedicated threads for things like shilling / techical support / gm / memes. Best of both worlds: start small and if the traffic overflows then decide. But definitely establish a direct line for grantees to ask questions.

Independent review

Another piece of unsolicited advice is independence of the assessment. I know it is more convenient to operate on a single Google Sheet but it can lead to “group think” and ratings / eligibility being influenced by seeing other answers. I strongly recommend independent ratings. Could be as simple as “duplicate sheet” and “enforcement on the social layer” by not looking how other rate the projects.

(this is high trust environment, people running the round know and trust each other)

Honest feedback / transparent review

After independent review is reconciled, totally possible to remove the names of individual jurors and public the results in the spirit of transparency and integrity.

“shill it forward”

Something that works well (idea cross-pollinated from CCN) is “shill it forward”. On the Twitter Spaces you are more than welcome to promote a project, it just cannot belongs to you.

Extra points for early submission

Another idea cross-polinated from CCN is the bonus for early bird or penalty for late submissions. This is to ensure smooth (on time) acceptance

Proposed VS retroactive

To avoid any potential future debates, worth stating explictly if the grant is for the proposed work or retroactive.

Established VS new

Sometimes there is a rule “projects neeed to be at least … old”

Sometimes you want to encourage new proposals, new ideas, from credible people with accountability and reputation.

Or maybe in order to establish project self-funding / bootstrapping / skin in the game required? Could be either, depending on circumstances and capital / time / energy / effort required to initiate a project.

Apppeals VS decision is final?

Maybe. Could be both. Finality means less work, less drama, faster turnaround.

Default suite of tools

Karma GAP: https://gap.karmahq.xyz/
Hypercerts: https://www.hypercerts.org/
DeVouch: https://devouch.xyz/
OpenSource observer (that’s mostly for the core rounds, as they focus on OSS)

Think 10x

My personal favourite: THINK BIGGER

Thread in this theme: How might we scale Gitcoin's Impact from $50mm GMV to $500m GMV? 📈