or
or
By clicking below, you agree to our terms of service.
New to HackMD? Sign up
Syntax | Example | Reference | |
---|---|---|---|
# Header | Header | 基本排版 | |
- Unordered List |
|
||
1. Ordered List |
|
||
- [ ] Todo List |
|
||
> Blockquote | Blockquote |
||
**Bold font** | Bold font | ||
*Italics font* | Italics font | ||
~~Strikethrough~~ | |||
19^th^ | 19th | ||
H~2~O | H2O | ||
++Inserted text++ | Inserted text | ||
==Marked text== | Marked text | ||
[link text](https:// "title") | Link | ||
![image alt](https:// "title") | Image | ||
`Code` | Code |
在筆記中貼入程式碼 | |
```javascript var i = 0; ``` |
|
||
:smile: | ![]() |
Emoji list | |
{%youtube youtube_id %} | Externals | ||
$L^aT_eX$ | LaTeX | ||
:::info This is a alert area. ::: |
This is a alert area. |
On a scale of 0-10, how likely is it that you would recommend HackMD to your friends, family or business associates?
Please give us some advice and help us improve HackMD.
Syncing
xxxxxxxxxx
Public Goods Coalition
Motivation
Over the last four years, Gitcoin has continuously identified new ways to push forward a variety of models for public goods funding in web3 most notably quadratic funding.
In this time, Gitcoin has contributed to taking the meme of public goods mainstream, and used it to fund projects like ethers.js, POAP, Snapshot, Uniswap, WalletConnect, Yearn, 1inch, Prysmatic Labs, Nimbus, and more.
While the impact of quadratic funding has grown massively as funded projects have begun to power the next wave of web3, the relative size of the matching pools and the total number of projects that have committed to actually funding public goods beyond the rhetoric has remained relatively small.
There are two reasons for this:
Although Gitcoin has gained a lot of legitimacy (furthered by our transition to a community governed DAO this year) there is still work to be done to create a consistent, sustainable and organized coalition as originally envisioned by the funder’s league we started memeing in 2018. This is partly because of the time cost for any DAO being in such a coalition relative to the amount of skin they have in the game.
Although quadratic funding has been tested, it is still not quite ready to be scaled to tens of millions of dollars of funding per quarter. This is partly related to the fact that we are still experimenting to ensure we have the best possible solution around sybil-resistance and that we have a variety of possible approaches that we can show work best for different kinds of grantees.
So how can we scale the work we're doing faster? How can we fund more experiments in a coordinated way?
Defining and Manifesting a New Coalition
Purpose
The Public Goods Coalition is aimed at finding new ways to run experiments for allocating funding to public goods in a participatory, grassroots way.
The coalition will have the following structure:
Coalition Structure
To accelerate experimentation, we would like to first accelerate the growing interest in public goods across the Ethereum ecosystem. To do this, we propose creating a meta coalition of funders (DAOs) with the following membership requirements:
In exchange for their commitment to public goods, DAOs may appoint 1-3 members to represent their interests in the DAO, with one member on the coalition multisig and up to 3 appointed members holding a non-transferrable NFT for off-chain voting on proposals. This allows the coalition to be participatory while practicing governance minimization.
To ensure streamlined operations, by default Gitcoin commits to taking on the overhead of drafting initial guidelines for members and helping to steward initial proposals. However, any member who wishes to participate in this process has equal right to do so.
The coalition will ideally start by including at least five projects that have clearly been committed to funding public goods as part of their direct mandate. Critically, at the risk of repetition, each member will have equal weight in all decision-making, and any member can propose an experiment to fund (see scope for more details).
Post-launch, the hope is that a number of other projects will commit to taking an active role in the coalition, both in terms of providing funding and proposing new experiments, especially those that have participated in Gitcoin Grants as matching funders before and have already taken small steps towards stewarding web3 towards the public good.
What is in Scope?
Defining what a public good is can be tricky and it has been an active conversation over the last year. Rather than creating a committee that sets these definitions, we believe the community should be deciding together.
To that end, we recommend scoping decision-making to how value flows through meta-public goods mechanisms i.e. experiments and mechanisms that distribute public goods according to community sentiment.
To clarify, no funding will be distributed to any entity for operations. Instead, coalition members would decide which mechanisms deploy funding to other broader public goods.
These mechanisms can include:
A second-order benefit of proceeding this way is that any new public goods funding mechanism can apply for funding in a credibly neutral space where DAOs can come together, rather than individual grants systems or decentralized mechanisms that may be biased towards their own tooling.
Measuring Results
It wouldn't be prudent to run experiments without having a sense of what we want to achieve.
There are two fundamental outcomes we want to see from the coaltion (although this is also up to member discussion):
How to Proceed?
How we proceed is entirely up to the community. Here's what would be required:
Collaborations We'd Love to See
There are a number of public goods initiatives already that we would love to see coordinating, beyond just Gitcoin. Some of these potential emerging DAOs were outlined in Kevin's post here.