GG24 Domains and Gitcoin Matching Pre-Ratification

🌱 Gitcoin Grants
1

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: $600,000, Third-party commits: $175,000
Gitcoin Match Request: $425,000

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

Public Goods R&D - Target: $332,500, Third-party commits: $132,500
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: $1,235,000

Total anticipated co-funding: $692,500
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.

Screenshot 2025-09-15 at 20.31.04
Screenshot 2025-09-15 at 20.31.042246Ă—920 371 KB

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 $1,235,000
  • 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.

14 Likes
2

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

4 Likes
3

thanks Matilda, I am in full support of what is being proposed here. Been great to work so closely alongside you, Kevin, Luuk, & Sov in this busy build up to GG24.

Lots of learnings and improvement potentials to take note of for next time, but also lots of wins as well! Pretty amazing to see so many awesome co-funders pick up the torch and join in on the funding festival alongside Gitcoin - @metahands @jon-spark-eco @SamanthaPower @paul2 @Oba-One @sharfy @holke @DavidDAO @davidacasey @vpabundance and many others :raised_hands: :raised_hands:

1 Like
4

Thank you @MathildaDV and everyone else for all the work put in. I really appreciate it, especially given the timeline pressure. I’m quite happy with the final domains shared with the community, and I’d also love to pre-ratify the matching.

In addition to agreeing with @owocki on the need for AI Builders and Privacy, I think we’re also missing a domain focused on enabling developers to access information about the grants ecosystem—past, present, and future—similar to Cartographer Syndicate and Crypto Grant Wire.

That said, there are many developers waiting for funding to continue their projects. Let’s vote and make this the start of GG24’s countdown!

1 Like
5

This could fit within / receive support from the Public Goods R&D domain I think!

3 Likes
6

Thanks, @MontyMerlin — hopefully so!

7

I approve the pre-ratified matching fund amounts from the multisig for GG24, totaling $1,255,00

With that dropping a few replies below:

It may be worth considering that we denominate GG rounds and the amounts to be disbursed in ETH moving forward. This would make it easier (IMO) to budget versus the ETH to $$ conversions.

Agree with @owocki here and would love to see what we can do to enable these domains in future rounds.

3 Likes
8

I approve the pre-ratified matching fund amounts from the Gitcoin.eth multisig for GG24, totaling $1,255,00

It’s been an intense but highly rewarding exercise meeting with the various co-funders and prospective domain operations. I’m confident the matches proposed will result in effectively funding what matters and set a solid foundation for further growth of the Domains and Gitcoin as a whole.

4 Likes
9

At a high level, this looks good to me. I like that Gitcoin is able to reduce or yank funding if the domain fails to achieve its goals.

I wanted to get a bit more details in the synthesis and tried to construct this table.

Round / Domain Name Target Funding 3rd-Party Funding / Commits Gitcoin Match Requested Operator(s) / Domain Stewards 3rd-Party Funders (Names & Amounts) Mechanism(s) Eligible Recipients / Scope / Eligible Projects
Ethereum Developer Tooling & Infrastructure $620,000 $175,000 $445,000 Steward: Dev Tools Guild. Domain Operators: Gitcoin Core & “Team Tiger” per operator aggregation plans. Vitalik is committing $175K and EF $55K (for Opex) Quadratic Funding ($200K) and Deep Funding with Seer prediction market ($350K) Free / open source dev tools, core infrastructure (SDKs, compilers, libraries, etc.), tooling meeting criteria of positive impact over time.
Interop Standards, Infra, and Analytics $300,000 $100,000 $200,000 Round Operators / Stewards: Rohith Malekar & Sov. $50K from EF; remaining $50K TBD Quadratic Funding ($150K) and Retro Rewards ($150K). Projects that work on Open Intents Framework standards / tools; open data / analytics; interoperability across chains.
Public Goods R&D $335,000 $135,000 $200,000 Stewarded by Recerts, led by DavidDAO & Sejal Rekhan; supported by CeloPG & Greenpill Dev Guild. CeloPG ($35,000), Octant ($20,000), Seer ($15,000), Allo ($15,000), FundingTheCommons ($10,000), GainForest ($5,000), Hypercerts ($5,000), 1Hive ($10,000 pending governance), PublicNouns ($10,000 pending governance) — sum ~$105,000 Conviction-based funding plus 20% in retro rewards Researchers, academic / applied studies, open source neutral tooling; projects producing mechanism / PGF insights, interoperable tools.
Targeted Development & Adoption $445,000 $185,000 $260,000 Steward / Domain Operator: “Ethereum For The World” (EFtW) — Luuk Weber, Monty Merlin, Erik Brinde. Cofunders: CeloPG, BioFi, CCN (Momus Collective), Ma Earth with $160,000 committed so far. Mixed: Direct grants (75% via Conviction Voting), Retro review (25%), outcome-based rounds. SDG-aligned development projects, local hubs, regional onboarding, bioregional reforestation, Web3 hubs, projects expanding Ethereum adoption in regions.
InfoFi $125,000 $50,000 $75,000 Steward / Proposal Lead: Butter team; Advisory Board: Robin Hanson, Yiling Chen, Bo Waggoner. So far no confirmed cofunders listed publicly. Prediction markets on Butter Information markets; prediction, advisory, decision, funding etc.; tools / infrastructure for InfoFi; usable by researchers, builders in Ethereum ecosystem.
Outcome Based Funding for Web3 Popups $125,000 $50,000 $75,000 Operator / Steward: Voicedeck; the proposal provides eligibility criteria and evaluation framework. So far no confirmed cofunders listed publicly. Hypercerts purchases + measurable cost-benefit ratios. Popup residencies & events that fulfill criteria (transparent budgets, outcomes, future editions, etc.), ILR residencies, pop-up cities, residencies.
Totals / Subtotals $1,950,000 $695,000 $1,255,000 — — — —

Separately, I believe there was some discussion about separating the funds available for projects from the total funding required to operate the round (including operators’ fees). It would be helpful to have those details captured here as well.

4 Likes
10

I love the Domain’s selection for GG24. IMO, it is doubling down on the things the GG Program has been supporting, but it is also creating a lot of room for experiments and new variables to enter the equation.

Having said that, I would also echo @ccerv1 concerns about Operational Expenses. The proposals mention that up to 13.6% could be going to Operations, but none of the proposals provide a “tentative breakdown” of those costs or even how they would be tracked and verified by Gitcoin Stakeholders.

This is important information to disclose for many reasons, but mainly because it’s between $125,500 - $170,680 being earmarked for operations out of the funding request from the matching pool.

2 Likes
11

I believe the tenative plan is to use fair fees no? I think @MathildaDV was going to bring that to a vote soon.

1 Like
12

Great summary @ccerv1. Just to clarify PGF R&D Round is also Mixed and will use Peer-Reviewed Hypercerts for the Mechanism Design Round. Also agree with @MontyMerlin @ivanmolto that the dashboard and map falls into the PGF R&D domain.

2 Likes
13

Yes fair fees are already baked into this ratification proposal. @LuukDAO and I will be posting an update that includes those details here shortly!

1 Like
14

I support ratifying these domains and appreciate all the work done by the community and stakeholders in sense-making to set these domains. Ratifying these rounds will enable us to move forward with the domains and continue to flesh them out more so builders and communities have a good experience in GG24.

One area I would like to see infused within the other rounds is a focus on privacy and identity given the privacy domain did not make the cut. Privacy is integral in my opinion to scaling Ethereum and adoption of regenerative tools. As an operator for the PG tooling round in the Public Goods R&D domain we’ll look to support privacy and identity as core primitives to build upon and hope to see other domains do the same where applicable.

3 Likes
15

Slight clarification on the Public Goods R&D domain. @paul2 and I are also operators and the mechanisms are hypercerts for the research round and conviction/retro funding for the PG tooling development round.

2 Likes
16

[UPDATED]: I have updated the post with the following details:

2 Likes
17

strong plus one here! privacy is an important public good and with the EF just releasing their privacy roadmap, we need to start prioritizing it!

2 Likes
18

@MathildaDV Missing a zero.

I have to type more to meet 30 character minimum

19

Looks good to me and would vote yes.

Also impatiently waiting on news about when/how Grants Stack will be revived (you know, that beautiful platform on which we spent tens of millions).

And yes I know Allo Protocol will be reused in some way (unclear to me in what way), and yes I know in GG24 you will step away from QF alone.

20

The sunk cost fallacy is a common decision-making bias where people continue an endeavor (time, money, effort, or resources) because they’ve already invested in it—even when the current costs outweigh the potential benefits.

I’m ready to let go of the sunk costs, I dont see any reason we’d revamp GS. IMO the costs of doing so outweigh the benefits. If there was demand for it (and profit from keeping it online), we’d have seen it when GS was alive 2023-2025.

That said @divine-comedian has been revamped some of the infrastrucutre and is running it now. More details here What's happening with the Grants stack indexer?

2 Likes