Thank you @kevin.olsen and congratulations on your first forum post! (great meeting you irl at ETHDenver and Boulder btw)
Based on the current architecture, I would imagine that the Public Goods Funding Workstream might evolve to support this as a ‘round manager’ that could run all sorts of different types of funding rounds for different ecosystems and causes with this product suite as the underlying stack. Potentially this might mean even educating other organisations and foundations on how to run rounds of their own. What do you think? @ceresstation
I really like how grants will be evolving and am excited to see it happen!
A lot of this architecture and product vision have been informed by the way the Gitcoin Grants program/Public Goods Funding Workstream have evolved over the the last 12-18 months with the significant scaling of siderounds and community appetite for aqueduct.
So yes, the modularity and composability of the architecture are to support that continued evolution as we seek to build the tech that enables the amazing work Public Goods Funding Workstream is embarking!
Potentially this might mean even educating other organisations and foundations on how to run rounds of their own.
Yes! We have heard from PGF that they plan to educate others on best practices for running founds. We hope this is another flywheel effect between the tech and operations of scaling public goods funding. It should also provide a short feedback loop between how the tech is (or is not) enable round management since we’re working together within the DAO.
I think we’re still in the phase where we’re building up our governance muscles here in the Gitcoin Product Collective but you’re spot on that the end state vision is one where we are converging on the workstream governance model.
It’s our hope that posts like these will help broadcast our intentions and bring in collaboration from the DAO, and ultimately create a smooth transition when this work finds it’s home as one or more funded workstreams inside the DAO.
I’ll likely edit this to respond in more detail when time permits, but I just want to say amazing job on this roadmap @kevin.olsen@lthrift. I’m super optimistic about the direction put forward here, and specifically about the level of thought put into our path towards decentralization. Excited for the great revival.
Listening to customer feedback and suggesting tools to improve round running UI/UX to Moonshot Collective
I don’t think this feedback would/should go to Moonshot Collective, but directly to the product team that is building this tooling. Innovation and continuous improvement should be a principal and practice of all teams building software for Gitcoin, not just Moonshot Collective.
A bit of a tangent for a separate post, but Moonshot Collective has the opportunity to really be the “blue ocean” focused team on the continuum of the product development lifecycle within Gitcoin Product Collective.
I am starting to see a marketplace develop that allows a user to plug and play their own rules for a grants round. They would select inclusive vs exclusive logic for grant eligibility, funding mechanism, and a sybil vendor. One example of these might be community curated, using QF Pairwise, and dPoPP standard sybil defense.
Do you see moonshot innovating on the marketplace for each of these solutions or on new protocols and dapps altogether? (While acknowledging that it is their decision)
Is that how you see the Gitcoin ecosystem expanding as well?
Very excited for this proposal. Super well-crafted and clearly a lot of long-term thinking here. This will be critical to making grants our grants program even better accessible to the community & scalable for years to come.
I think Moonshot could certainly be innovating on new protocols and dapps in this space, but I don’t think they will be exclusively. My hope is that the future of Gitcoin Grants is not only built in an open source manner, but that strategy enables the open source expansion of the Gitcoin ecosystem.
Great and visionary overview, finally caught up on this and all comments below.
I believe this post will be quoted often in the future, so for that reason, a little possible thing to edit is under 'questions you might have, this last bullet point…
… seems to be missing an answer?
Another question I personally have: will any of the work previously done by the dgrants team be recycled? Is part of what was done in that workstream over the past 6 months worth integrating into this new initiative?
The work done by the dgrants team was to build out a POC which I believe we succeed.
Building out the actual integration using the learning from the dgrants POC.
While it is too early to say if code would be re-used, I do believe our decisions made here would be based off what we built out on dGrants
Good eyes spotting that dangling question there, that definitely got lost in the writing/editing process.
The answer was hinted at here:
So to flesh that out: our goal is to unbundle the gitcoin grants user and management experiences and provide a container that allows for a pluralistic future with many parallel mechanisms being deployed by different communities. Imagine a smaller ecosystem with high levels of trust, perhaps a DAO funding grants for internal teams, or an IRL community offering a small curated list of grants for their member to steer. We could see non-QF mechanisms being the right fit, and we want the grants 2.0 protocol to be the logical first place to stand up that grant program, and let these communities experiment on the meta-problem space of optimal distribution of funds for public goods.
is there more progress on this? is there a way I can be part of this conversation more often?
it seems like there’s a symmetry for the work you guys are doing with modular design to facilitate mechanism design prototyping and what we’re doing in “The Matrix” (which I’m renaming to “Mechanism Design” for next season) squad within FDD.
part of the vision is to build a simulation environment to do agent based behavioral analysis (using reinforcement learning/game theory) in an environment that is as close to reality as possible. Here is a rough document explaining our vision.
i think it would be amazing if we met in the middle of our orthogonal perspectives and collaborate.
Yes, we’ve kicked off 2/3 workstreams, and will be kicking off the explorer/round manager here soon. I’d love to get you across the project, especially given the amount of overlap in thinking about mechanism plurality, data sharing, personhood/community anti-fraud signals… the list goes on.
It’s great to see the dialogue unfolding across multiple channels, but I’m noticing the challenge of broadcasting, and sustaining a conversation around Grants 2.0. If you have some thoughts on a better way for us to keep people informed and involved (updates, community calls, dedicated channel in discord) I’d appreciate your ideas.
Would love to help you get this support, definitely part of how a product marketer could help. Haven’t gotten any submissions to this yet, would love any help from anyone in promoting or making introductions to folks who might be interested.
I think you’ve joined, but for transparency in the conversation here we’ve just spun this up! Currently limited to DAO contributors, with the potential to open up wider as we build our community engagement muscles: Discord