Over the past few weeks, weāve heard from many of you on the forum and others through personal outreach (even in person in Bogota). Iām going to synthesize feedback into one response.
First of all, THANK YOU to everyone who helped us arrive at this decision. Your feedback is invaluable and weāll have a stronger decision because of it. This discussion proves the value of building in public and how collective input can get to better decision making.
After connecting with many of you, weāve recognized there is ultimately more than an option 1 or 2, there is an option 3. We believe this option better aligns with the majority of responses and intend to move this to a DAO-wide vote as a Y/N decision. If this vote is successful, we will begin preparing for a protocol-driven, streamlined and tightly-scoped GR16.
GR16 Option 3
Gitcoin will run a streamlined alpha round on the protocol in mid-January 2023 for our oldest running rounds: Open Source Software, Ethereum Infrastructure, and Climate.
Each round will run with a subset of existing grantees to ensure those that rely on us for funding and have helped make a significant impact in the ecosystem continue receiving support (refer to @umarkhaneth analysis above for more details on data about our grantees), that we have the capacity to provide support during the transition, and that we are able to work with the community to intentionally receive feedback and build out operational services to support scaling future rounds soon.
This option takes into account the desire to run a streamlined round in GR16, not lose momentum, and ensure when we launch at scale in early Q2, 2023 on the protocol that it is more stable and reliable for grantees, both technically and operationally.
In addition we will be running a number of design partner rounds between now and the full protocol launch in early Q2, 2023 that will provide both partners and grantees with opportunities to engage with our grants protocol.
While weāre always optimizing for impact, itās sometimes important to make short term trade-offs - progress is not often linear. Rather than run a sub-par GR16 on c-grants or risk going too big too soon with the protocol, weāve opted to make tradeoffs to ensure long term growth and sustainability for Gitcoin Grants, our partners and our grantees. Weāre optimistic that this approach will help hundreds of additional communities fund their shared needs, and thousands of new grantees get the sustainable funding they need. Stay tuned for more details and communications about next steps.
Additional Summary of Findings
In the interest of full transparency, here are some of the key points from the community:
Gitcoin grantees survey responses suggest we should prioritize the protocol transition
40 grantees responded to a survey that went out to all GR15 grantees about what they wanted to see for GR16 and majority would be supportive of the option weāre positioning (see data from responses below).
To the question: āHow would you react if we shifted GR16 to focus on a successful protocol launch in Q1, 2023 instead?ā
-
51% said they would prefer if you ran a small round with only a few key causes in GR16 and delayed the protocol launch
-
23% would be excited about and support the prioritization around the protocol
-
8% said they would be upset and leave the Gitcoin community if we donāt run GR16
-
18% said they were not sure
Summary of differing opinions and how the option detailed above addresses these perspectives
Keep the current format until weāre sure of protocol stability
Some expressed reasonable concerns and cautionary anecdotes about leaving the current c-grants platform too soon. Weāre cautiously optimistic, but want to make consistent, reliable, and incremental progress.
Run something streamlined vs nothing at all
It is clear that the majority would like us to run a round in GR16 to continue supporting our core community and not lose momentum, all while realizing the risk of potential protocol delays. Many recognize the tension between running a round on c-grants and how that pulls us in a different direction to where our priorities lie: successfully bringing a new version of grants to life.
Run all or no grant rounds for GR16
A few of you suggested that we would impact the community if we did a selective round and should either do the full round or nothing at all. We believe in concavity ā the best policy decisions are often somewhere in the middle. In addition, we are hard at work putting in plan an approach to support our extended grantee community even if it isnāt in the traditional grants round capacity.
Donāt run a grants round and spend the time focusing on protocol launch
Similarly, there were a few people who suggested going with option 1, to ensure our focus was on the potential future benefits to new grantees and not existing ones. We believe this approach allows us to take care of both.
Run a round with community support
We appreciate the few cause round grantees who volunteered to involve the community to help run GR16. Itās hard to solicit help for the centralized platform. When we launch the protocol, weāll be able to decentralize grant rounds further and look to our community to help us run rounds and make a larger impact than we could with just a small internal team. Weāre excited to get to start bringing this future to life and involve more of our community in our program design.
Once again, I canāt thank you all enough for your engagement in this discussion and your feedback. Weāre excited to keep building the future of funding communities shared needs with all of you.