Thank you for acknowledging this point!
This is a great idea.
It’s so hard to follow the budgeting processes because workstreams are so bloated and they don’t map to the DAOs goals. This makes it hard to see where the $1 million per month is going, and which outcomes they achieves. Since oversight is so complicated, this means there is not a lot of accountability to outcomes.
@a33titude brings up an important point.
Gitcoin has modular protocols. But it’s budgeting is not really modular at all! If funding was more modular and it were tied to outcomes, that’d make it much easier to track what is worth funding and what is not.
TLDR I think a sign of a more mature GitcoinDAO would be if there was competition for modular teams creating outcomes.