GG24 Domains and Gitcoin Matching Pre-Ratification

GG24 Domains and Gitcoin Matching Pre-Ratification

This proposal aims to ratify the Domains to run during GG24 and provide Gitcoin pre-approval on matching funds for these respective domains.

Thank you to @MontyMerlin, @LuukDAO, and @Sov for driving the Domain Operator Success Program that has resulted in the aggregation of 22 sensemaking reports into the top 4 domains for GG24.

Background

Gitcoin Grants has transitioned from a QF-only model to a multi-mechanism approach—first piloted in GG23—structured through an adapted Dedicated Domain Allocation framework. Rather than centralizing decisions about what to fund, GG24 opens that sensemaking process to the community, inviting them to participate directly alongside us. After the sensemaking reports were submitted, we entered an aggregation phase, led by the Domain Operator Success Program.

Based on the Domain Proposals that have been submitted, and meet the criteria as specified in the Domain Operator Success Program and GG24: Structure, Strategy and Timeline, the following Domains are proposed for ratification with their respective Gitcoin Match amount, which are approved based on a conditional basis*:

Proposed Matching Fund Allocation

Ethereum Developer Tooling & Infrastructure - Target: $620,000, Third-party commits: $175,000
Gitcoin Match Request: $445,000

Interop Standard, Infra, and Analytics - Target: 300,000, Third-party commits: $100,000
Gitcoin Match Request: $200,000

Public Goods R&D - Target: $335,000, Third-party commits: $135,000
Gitcoin Match Request: $200,000

Targeted Development and Adoption - Target: $445,000, Third-party commits: $185,000
Gitcoin Match Request: $260,000

InfoFi - Target: $125,000, Third-party commits: $50,000
Gitcoin Match Request: $75,000

Outcome Based Funding for Web3 Popups - Target: $125,000, Third-party commits: $50,000
Gitcoin Match Request: $75,000

Total anticipated Gitcoin Match during GG24: $1,255,000

Total anticipated co-funding: $695,000
Anticipated co-funding percentage: 55%

*If a Domain fails to achieve at least 80% of its fundraising goal or shows signs of serious operational challenges, a GG24 Matching council consisting of MathildaDV, Sov, and Luuk will have the ability to reduce or withdraw Gitcoin’s Matching commitment.

Key Differences in GG24

We have moved away from the OSS & Community Round structure, and have folded funding areas into the proposed domains that came out of sensemaking. As it relates to funding for GG24, we will partner with all domain allocators and software providers to action out payouts. For the Dev Tooling & Infrastructure domain, Giveth will manage core ops, and we will manage payouts directly for the QF round, after following the same process for results and sybil resistance.

Current Matching Pool Status

The Matching Pool is heavily denominated in ETH. We are continuing to work with Avantgarde to improve financial sustainability while managing market impacts. Latest report here.

Moving forward, our strategy involves increasing our stablecoin allocation to reduce volatility, generate revenue on idle assets, and maintain upside potential through strategic ETH exposure, all while ensuring we can meet our dollar-denominated spending commitments.

Proposal for Community Vote

We request the community to vote on the following options:

  • Yes, approve the pre-ratified matching fund amounts from the multisig for GG24, totaling $1,255,00
  • No, do not approve.
  • No, follow the traditional process of ratification after the round.
  • Abstain

Please share your thoughts and vote in the comments below.

Thank you for your continued support and participation in Gitcoin Grants governance.

3 Likes

This is a pretty good ratio out of the gate! Way better than the Gitcoin 2.0 days!

this seems pretty sane to me.

just to close the loop on the “number of domains” issue, i think we’ve bene able to fold about 70% - 75% of the top domain proposals into the consolidated 4-5 domains.

to me, the “ones that got away” are AI Builders and Privacy. those are super hot metas that i would love for gitcoin to have a hand in, as a means of re-establishing relevance. but i also understand the constraints that led us here. and i guess its okay to start simpler. so i think were landing on a mixed/partial success.

i dont think theres anything “wrong” with waiting to do these domains from a process perspective, but i do think that gitcoin fades into irrelevance if we arent doing stuff in the most innovative areas. now that we’re doing rounds only every 6 months insetad of every 3-4 months, there are bigger consequences to missing doing something in a round.

so to me its not about right/wrong its about achieving relevance and being on the frontier - which all feed into the opportunities we have for future fundraising (a primary KPI).

i’m leaning in this direction