Thanks for this proposal on DeFi Transparency & Decentralization â strengthening trust in DeFi through assessment frameworks feels critical for both users and builders.
In our proposal, we didnât propose a domain but instead are seeking to validate whether CollabBerryâs peer-based allocation and accountability tooling could serve across multiple domains as a complementary mechanism.
What resonates here is the shared emphasis on transparency as legitimacy. Your proposal looks at transparency in protocols and decentralization in governance, while CollabBerry is focused on transparency inside funded projects â specifically, how contributors are recognized and how resources are distributed post-grant. Through continuous peer-to-peer assessments, our mechanism produces a reputation signal that informs more equitable allocations, creating a traceable record of accountability.
This feels like a micro-level complement to your macro-level assessment: if DeFi needs external transparency to prove decentralization, projects themselves need internal transparency to prove fairness.
Weâd love your perspective: do you see contributor-level accountability as relevant for extending DeFi transparency principles into the way public goods teams operate after funding?