[Proposal] Ratify the Results of GG18 and Formally Request the Community Multisig Holders to Payout Matching Allocations

đŸŒ± Gitcoin Grants
, , ,
64

I wanted to share an insightful piece written by Blocktrend, a leading blockchain media in Taiwan. The article provides a detailed analysis of Gitcoin Grants 18 results. Originally intended for Blocktrend’s readers, the piece offers a comprehensive review of how Gitcoin identifies “voting troops” and addresses the issue of “wrongful accusations”.

The article delves into the specifics of the Quadratic Funding mechanism, the concept of community importance, and the challenges faced by projects in attracting diverse supporters. It also highlights the potential of Gitcoin Grants as a sustainable funding model for small to medium-sized projects in the blockchain space.

We believe that this article could serve as a valuable resource for the Gitcoin community as well. Here is the link to the article:

Feel free to share it with others who might find it informative. We appreciate your time and look forward to hearing your thoughts on the piece.

6 Likes
65

What next? Are we proceeding with payouts or ratification of the results?

3 Likes
66

I’m flagging this :black_flag:because few things are not proper in a certain manner :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like
67

The word “SYBIL” is enough to bring create a panic sensation in market :grin:

1 Like
68

“ For example, EtherScore, which is ranked first in the table, had an original voter count of 2,941, but the final number of eligible voters was only 643. In other words, nearly 80% of the voters for this project were determined to be voting troops. ”

IMG_3644
IMG_36442898×966 322 KB

I don’t think :thought_balloon: they understand how this works because the 643 voters were the ones with matching funds. There were not any voters who were removed. They simply didn’t have their Gitcoin passport score higher than 20 points for the matching funds.

So the article is misleading.

1 Like
69

The vote :ballot_box: will conclude in a few days which is already overwhelmingly for the approval of funds being distributed. That will take place afterwards.

3 Likes
70

æˆȘ朖 2023-09-29 例捈11.56.28
æˆȘ朖 2023-09-29 例捈11.56.281480×602 198 KB

Thank you for your response and clarification. I understand your concern, but I believe there may be some misunderstanding. The diagram provided explains the difference between Base Voters and Eligible Voters.

As mentioned, voters must have a Gitcoin passport score higher than 20 and donation over $1 to become Base Voters. These Base Voters then undergo additional screening to ensure they are not sybils, bots, or duplicate accounts before becoming Eligible Voters. The final results are determined through simpleQF and cluster-matching QF separately.

2 Likes
71

You are correct :white_check_mark:
 I am wrong :expressionless:


I see the difference here on the original contributions which makes more sense. It’s just not included in the article and that’s why I felt it was misleading.

IMG_3645
IMG_36451125×2436 275 KB

1 Like
72

Thanks Jon for the response & explanation. We’ll try to do better next round.

3 Likes
73

Hello everyone.

Thanks to @umarkhaneth and the team for your efforts.

On behalf of our team at DeFi Africa, I would like to know when the payouts will be carried out?

We had a planned to host a workshop in this October, which has already been announced and registration is full. We’re just left with some few days away to the workshop and funds are yet to be released.

I would like to know when it’s planned to release so we can reschedule our event.

3 Likes
74

Hey @realsahabia thanks for your message and you have my apologies for this taking so long that you’re considering rescheduling your event. Payouts should go out early this upcoming week. Could you dm me on telegram and we can figure out how to support your event in the meantime? I’m umarkhaneth on there as well.

2 Likes
75

Thanks to all Gitcoin Team for the hardwrok. :herb:

76

There are five projects in the climate round that received more than $15,000 - why has the matching cap not been enforced in these instances?

77

The matching cap is different by round. Climate has a 10% cap on the $250,000 in the main climate pool for a $25k cap

1 Like
78

Hey @umarkhaneth thanks for your response. Please find my message on your telegram inbox.

1 Like
79

All core rounds have now been paid out!! :tada::tada::tada: (with the exception of shell’s 100k side pool for climate)

If you have any questions please reach out on telegram: umarkhaneth

5 Likes
80

I was told somewhere that the gitcoin rule of no VC funding was revoked. I am not sure if that is true, but I think it is a mistake if so.

My view as a small project is that I feel much of Gitcoin is a popularity contest that benefits established projects way more than early ones? For me at-least, I would need to rank in the top 50, probably the top 30 minimum to survive if I did not have community funding from my primary tribe.

While I cannot confirm it, I also feel like some of the projects in the top ranks may not fully qualify, or may be violating the VC funding, aka double-dipping.

I checked some and one that stands out is DefiLab.xyz whos domain points to a for sale page


Another that is a name that stands out is 4EVERLAND who IIRC has made VC biz dev deals and operates as a .Inc (meaning they have big fish investors more cases then not).

Some of these names I recognize as legit projects providing a valuable service like revoke.cash.

I feel a lot more vetting is needed on funding so that projects that actually need the money get it. I am fortunate to have a community funding source outside of Gitcoin, but if I did not, frankly the work I’m doing for the space would never exist and I would be working as a consultant again. But I do hope as my project grows, I can rely on Gitcoin more than getting a few hundred USD a quarter.

Unrelated to who gets what, some general product feedback is that the on/off ramps need solving. All the L2 stuff just fragments things and makes it more painful than cGrants ever was such only the most dedicated supporter will go though the BS needed to donate.

The batch donating is a good thing but we need to have a unified means of donating across grant pools, a unified profile for all grants on gitcoin.co, and a frictionless way to go from USD to X crypto to donate, KYC or not.

Overall I echo a lot of the criticism @lefterisjp left on Twitter. Im also glad to see someone helped his project outside Gitcoin :slight_smile:

Kudos.

5 Likes
81

Can confirm the site goes here.

IMG_3710
IMG_37101125×2436 277 KB

The actual site is here. It doesn’t look like it’s been updated since 2021


IMG_3713
IMG_37131125×2436 212 KB

Twitter is unfortunately not as active as one :point_up: might hope.

I only see one post about Gitcoin from the Alpha round so this is definitely a bit suspicious.

IMG_3715
IMG_37151125×2436 364 KB

IMG_3712
IMG_37121125×2013 444 KB

The one :point_up: thing that does raise a bit of a red flag :triangular_flag_on_post: is the number of donations. I can’t tell if these are legitimate donations or not based on their campaign activity on social media.

It’s also very hard to imagine 2370 individual donations being made when we all spent two weeks straight in Gitcoin radio :radio: fighting to get over 100 donations. Maybe we are missing something here but something definitely doesn’t add up.

IMG_3711
IMG_37111125×2436 312 KB

1 Like
82

The results overall look great, I’m personally very happy to see some of my favorite regen projects make it to the top in the Climate round!

2 Likes
83

Well done Guys , Looking forward to help the community in upcoming rounds as well .

2 Likes