One common thread that I see in all of Gitcoin’s initiatives is a dedication to trying to rally around and create positive-sum games. The original bounties platform sought to create win-win situations between those who needed work and those who wanted to supply it, reducing coordination costs and enhancing ecosystem efficiency. Grants seeks to make giving funds fun, and create a positive-sum game around funding the ecosystem. KERNEL looks at educating from a holistic perspective, and seeks to train people to think positive-sum.
I’d like to suggest a workstream dedicated to discovering positive-sum loops in the wider ecosystem and trying to implement them. We’re watching more zero-sum games creep in, imho, especially as the financial applications bloom. Traditional finance is often fond of zero-sum games, and if we want to try to keep the positive-sum ecosystem, we should be looking for every vector we could make it happen in.
I see this as primarily being a working group and task force. A working group to think of and research new ideas, and a task force that can go make it happen.
As a member of the Ethereum Cat Herders, I see this as being very much in line with our ethos of decentralized ecosystem coordination, and would be very happy to try to coordinate collaboration.
I like this idea of a wider, zoomed out research group that stays current by observing what other patterns exist in parallel spaces, and actively discusses them to find new ideas or validate existing principles.
I’m new but count me in! I enjoy this process a lot and do it naturally
names are hard, still wrapping my head around all this stuff - happy to brainstorm them w/ you if it helps
Love this idea, I’d be happy to include some time for this in the public goods funding workstream if it helps, ultimately we’re trying to find ways to make the whole ecosystem sustainable and that includes researching and implementing all kinds of positive-sum loops not just those that use Gitcoin Grants.
Maybe we could start there and then potentially branch off from that initial meeting if there are other projects people have in mind?
My original thoughts were of a kind of think-tank/task force. Does that fit in to your track? By the name, I thought they might need to be separate - the idea I’m thinking of isn’t about funding necessarily. Maybe I’ll give one example that’s been weighing on me for a while.
While I’m hesitant to name names, I think they are necessary for the following. I think it’s clear that Uniswap and Sushi view attracting liquidity as something approaching a zero-sum game at this point. There have certainly been a bunch of salty memes between the two camps. If we posit that zero-sum behavior is less productive for the ecosystem than positive-sum, the next step would be to think of how to flip attracting liquidity into an overtly positive-sum game. The first thought (at least for me) was that if it was possible to create a layer in between the two (and whomever, so long as security can be assured) which allowed Sushi to benefit from Uni’s liquidity and vice versa, then each would be interested in the other platform accruing liquidity, since their own boat is also moved up with the rising tide.
I have no idea how that would be possible. It might be impossible. It’s an example of something that a group could research, coordinate, and implement (if it is possible). It might even be able to be permissionless. There’s nothing about funding goods in there, though, I think this might be more like “keeping public goods good or making them gooder” if I can riff off of @owocki 's frequent line.
That being said, if you think the best way forward is a merge, I’m all for it. I just wanted to be clear about what I’m talking about.
This is something @austingriffith posted on Twitter, but perhaps there is a way to introduce a staking mechanism that puts a small amount into funding public goods (1-5%), then allocates funds to different LPs to maximize gains.
I know you mentioned these could be different from public goods funding, (which I support!), this public good tilt may just be an easy place to start.
Creating positive sum incentives more broadly is something we would love to support.
@wschwab any room for a non tech member sir, I can assist in research on liquidity de-fragmentation and proper utility of Unified Sustainable Liquidity which can open up a new level of application. degrees of freedom (genius contract with L2 & L1 and crosschain interaction) and can be put to fund real value projects. I can may be able to volunteer or as an intern.
I think you’re in the right place. Just to be clear, this is just a suggestion, nothing is figured out yet. Right now I’m kinda waiting on a Public Good workgroup call/meeting/powwow/thing being arranged, and figure we’ll try to figure out more details there. Research is super important for something like this! I think it’ll be great to have you onboard.
There isn’t anything worked out right now for any salaries, nor would I expect there to be anytime soon. (I suspect there is a possibility that if a working group like this has proven results over a decent timespan, say a year or so, that it wouldn’t be crazy to ask for some funding.) We’re all volunteer over here!
love your idea, @wschwab
This suggestion is more like infinite game rather than zero-sum game.
Finally Gitcoin would be an infinite game, including supporting public goods etc.
Quite new to all of this as well, but eagerly learning - with a background more in the Humanities I think a philosophically, or perhaps epistemologically, -inclined group would do gitcoin, and blockchain at large, a lot of good.
Perhaps just monthly reports or something that can cut past the investing/currency/liquidity connotation of blockchain, and instead illustrate how small projects create the tangible steps towards a future that could benefit from such technologies in a pretty straight-forward manner - am I understanding your idea here at least somewhat correctly @wschwab ? If not, perhaps I will propose this group, or some diminutive rendition of something similar, as a separate proposal if that is OK with you.
