Iām excited about your interesting proposal, @thedevanshmehta , @nidiyia , and @JamesFarrell ! Nidhi explained this proposal for me in a more detail.
Iām working on public goods funding, impact evaluation, and evidence-based practice(EBP). And then, Iām a co-organizer of popup village, ākuu villageā. kuu village would like to join in the round!
In Oct, first kuu village will be held in Nara City(former Tsukigase Village), in Japan. Multiple kuu village will happen all over the world, but first kuu village is still proto-type. Iād like to provide a quick introduction before my feedback for the proposal.
Quick introduction for ākuu villageā
kuu village is a one-week co-living program where participants immerse themselves in the worldview of ākuuā through daily life. It serves as a living laboratory that combines an off-grid lifestyle with Decentralized technologies to simultaneously explore autonomy, collaboration, and circularity. Participants let go of attachment to ownership and hierarchy, co-creating shelter, energy, water, food, and governance through their relationships with others. The insights and outcomes gained from this experience are shared as open source and passed on to the next community.
kuu village is inspired by previous popup village like Zuzalu. However, we more focus on the physical experience and physical practice. According to d/acc, d/acc is including the factor of āatom(physical)ā, not only ābits(digital)ā, so we huge focus on physical technologies for resilient societies as well as digital technologies like Ethereum. For example, physical technologies mean that self-building house, digging a well, and more. Of course, we are planning the experiment of onchain governance, onchain reputation, funding allocation for public goods, SALSA NFTs, broad-listening, and more. We aim at a practical and experimental-centric popup village, not discussion-centric one.
The detail is available here: [PUBLIC]kuuvillage_2025 - Google Slides
Feedback for the proposal
Iām interested in this approach in this proposal since Iām huge contributing in evaluation outcomes and impacts. Traditional impact / outcome evaluation need a logic model before the projects, but a logic model is sometimes solid and is not flexible, I think. We will also introduce the portfolio approach and weāre interested in a dynamic, flexible and complex model, so I agree with your idea that LLM generates outcomes and benefits based-on the actual outputs after the projects. However, there is a problem for kuu village, especially. kuu village has more physical experience, and it is more difficult to record the experience than digital outputs like source cord and research papers. There is oracle problem. Of course, we can publish the recap report after kuu village, but it is hard to verify whether the information is true or false. I wonāt publish a fake info haha
Conclusion
We ākuu villageā would like to join the round if this proposal is accepted. And then, I would like to contribute to improve the evaluation system since I work in impact space. This proposal is totally interesting!