[Proposal] Gitcoin’s Citizen Grants program

[krrisis]

Thanks for the detailed proposal.

Some random thoughts that came up while reading through + checking comments:

• The fact that Gitcoin is interested in adopting the Citizens name for its wider ecosystem funding program shows that we’ve been doing a good job over the past two rounds with our Citizens Rounds, and this makes me proud.

@CoachJonathan

Community members wishing to submit GCPs should use the template provided in the Citizen Grants website (WIP) . You can also review a sample proposal on the Citizen Grants website (WIP) .

• I’m not finding this sample proposal + the temp website for citizens innovate refers to apply through Seagrants for a GCP but this links back to the homepage of the gov forum. WIP I guess but just flagging.

@CoachJonathan

Each GCP will be reviewed by the Grants Council and be given a response within 10 business days.

@CoachJonathan

In an ideal future state, this function will be decentralized either to a council of external contributors or to Gitcoin Stewards, with ultimate decision rights sitting within the community.

To show an openness to this projected ideal future and to keep the DAO spirit alive in this pretty centralized current state of the DAO I would recommend having a few members of the Steward council involved in the decision making process. Starting with the current setup consolidates and leads to further centralization imo and an even higher workload for the same small group of people, which is a central point of failure. I made earlier proposals on involving Stewards more here. I know it’s not the way in which Gitcoin is evolving atm, so this is just for the record & consideration.

Happy to read that rohit will take some work off of everyone’s plate!

@CoachJonathan

• All approved project owners must KYC with Gitcoin to receive rewards.

I wonder if this is really necessary as you are rewarding in GTC tokens only? For full time people this makes sense, for occasional contributors who wish to stay anonymous this is not very inviting.

@CoachJonathan

clawback mechanism.

• great and even crucial to have this, but …it may seem like a detail but if at all possible I’d recommend a less aggressive, hostile and less corporate term here. You could eg go with reclaim or recovery mechanism?

• I’m okay with the name Citizens Retro for our rounds, in the sense that we were already calling them Citizens Retroactive Funding Rounds anyway, Citizens Retro Rounds are even catchier.

• I like that GCPs are now an acronym for Gitcoin Citizens Proposals

No further comments, this is a solid proposal with an appropriate budget & security built in. It will contribute to making our DAO more porous (again) so I will be voting yes.