[temp check] transitionary stewards cohort
a temp check for gov.gitcoin.co. nothing here is decided. reactions, objections, and referrals wanted before anything goes to a vote.
tl;dr
- gitcoin is transitioning to its next form. the 3.0 team shouldn’t grade its own homework
- proposal: a small, paid cohort of stewards (aug 2026 through march 2027, ~3 hours a month) to steward the transition, with payments tranched as a recurring leash on the 3.0 team
- stipend paid and disclosed, amount tbd. no names yet, criteria below
- also floating: a trust graph to programmatically disperse owocki’s delegated voting power over time
why
gitcoin is in transition. the 2026 strategy post laid out the reset; the q2 2026 budget report shows where we stand. the next chapter points beyond ethereum-native grants toward funding real life, locally. a transition this big should not be stewarded by the 3.0 team grading its own homework.
so we’re reviving stewardship, in a form fit for what gitcoin is now: small, paid, high trust, time boxed.
the shape
- name: transitionary stewards cohort
- charter: steward gitcoin’s transition from what it is to what it could be, and keep the 3.0 team honest while we do it
- term: august 2026 through march 2027
- time commitment: 1.5 hours a month on a call, 1.5 hours a month async. deliberately light. we want judgment, not labor
compensation
- a flat stipend per steward for the full term. amount and denomination tbd, fixed before invitations go out
- unconditional. not tied to how they vote, what they conclude, or whether they agree with us
- stewards recuse on any vote touching their own compensation
- disclosed here, on purpose. stewarding a transition is real work and we’d rather pay for it transparently than rely on favors
- paid in tranches over the term rather than up front
accountability cuts both ways
steward and budget payments release in tranches, roughly quarterly through the end of term. that gives the cohort (and the community) a recurring leash on the 3.0 team: if the work isn’t landing, the next tranche is the natural checkpoint to say so. the first vote covers only the first tranche.
who we’re looking for
we’re not naming names yet. the criteria:
- people who understand the old world and the new: they lived gitcoin’s ethereum-native era and can reason about what comes next
- people we trust to have a good faith, constructive conversation about a hard transition
- people whose presence adds legitimacy to the process rather than borrowing from it
the cohort’s first act will be to refer others who fit these criteria, and to propose improvements to the process itself. if that’s you or someone you know, comment below.
an idea we’re floating: a trust graph for delegation
longer term, we’re exploring a trust graph so steward selection outgrows the founder’s list. the mechanism: stewards and community members express trust, the graph aggregates it, and delegation updates programmatically over time. it would be seeded with the gtc voting power currently delegated to owocki (no tokens change hands), with the explicit goal of dispersing that voting power away from the founder as the graph matures. early thinking, feedback wanted.
first agenda
the cohort’s first call opens with a gtc retrospective: promises made and promises kept, wins and losses, what’s next. we’ll publish the output here on the forum.
from there, the work is the transition itself.
the temp check
before this goes anywhere near a vote, tell me:
- where does legitimacy during this transitionary period come from, to you?
- is this the right shape? (size, term, time commitment, charter)
- is paid stewardship the right call, and what should the stipend look like?
- who fits the criteria above? name them below or dm me.
- does the trust graph direction excite or worry you? why?
owocki