🆕 Moonwell outlines process to return overclaimed Pre-Bug Remediation rewards for Base Safety Module; limited discussion (3 replies, NickyB requested instructions)
This is about addressing overclaimed “Pre-Bug Remediation Rewards for the Base Safety Module” and establishing a clear process for returning those excess rewards to preserve trust and fairness; doing so benefits community confidence but requires operational follow-up and administrative effort to remediate the overclaims. Community engagement is limited (3 replies) and includes at least one member (NickyB) actively requesting instructions to return the overclaimed rewards.
⏩ More details
This is about addressing overclaimed “Pre-Bug Remediation Rewards for the Base Safety Module” and establishing a clear process for returning those excess rewards to preserve trust and fairness; doing so benefits community confidence but requires operational follow-up and administrative effort to remediate the overclaims. Community engagement is limited (3 replies) and includes at least one member (NickyB) actively requesting instructions to return the overclaimed rewards.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin proposal: $20K to build open-source DAO Starter Kit with SybilShield (Passport, BrightID, Proof of Humanity) for one‑click deployments — 6‑month roadmap, no community discussion
- Proposal to build an open-source DAO Starter Kit and SybilShield identity toolkit integrating Gitcoin Passport, BrightID, and Proof of Humanity to enable one-click DAO deployment, pre-built smart contract templates, governance guides, and fair participation in Gitcoin Grants, thereby expanding public goods adoption and lowering barriers for builders. \n- Requested budget is $20,000 (Development $10,000; Documentation $4,000; Testing/workshops $4,000; Outreach/translations $2,000), roadmap spans a 6-month rollout, and there have been no community discussions to date.
⏩ More details
- Proposal to build an open-source DAO Starter Kit and SybilShield identity toolkit integrating Gitcoin Passport, BrightID, and Proof of Humanity to enable one-click DAO deployment, pre-built smart contract templates, governance guides, and fair participation in Gitcoin Grants, thereby expanding public goods adoption and lowering barriers for builders. \n- Requested budget is $20,000 (Development $10,000; Documentation $4,000; Testing/workshops $4,000; Outreach/translations $2,000), roadmap spans a 6-month rollout, and there have been no community discussions to date.
⏩ More details
❤2
🆕 Andrew Saul proposes Jupiter grants to fund Solana "vibe coding" apps on devfunpump and poofnew — aims to attract builders but risks inconsistent outcomes and lacks community discussion
- Andrew Saul proposes a grants scheme to fund builders creating apps that use Jupiter services on Solana “vibe coding” platforms, primarily devfunpump (leader) and poofnew. \n- Benefits: attract skilled Solana creators, increase content and app experimentation, and possibly produce a breakout Jupiter-integrated app; costs/risks: outcomes may be inconsistent due to widely varying integration depth, and there have been no community discussions.
⏩ More details
- Andrew Saul proposes a grants scheme to fund builders creating apps that use Jupiter services on Solana “vibe coding” platforms, primarily devfunpump (leader) and poofnew. \n- Benefits: attract skilled Solana creators, increase content and app experimentation, and possibly produce a breakout Jupiter-integrated app; costs/risks: outcomes may be inconsistent due to widely varying integration depth, and there have been no community discussions.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin proposal requests $25k for EPIC Awards platform setup; raises budget-alignment and overhead concerns, owocki suggests token-swap alternative contingent on policy ratification
The proposal requests $25,000 for custom platform setup, support, and operations for the EPIC Awards (Ethereum People’s Choice Awards — Powered by Pairwise), which could enable event/platform readiness but raises budget-alignment concerns relative to the “TEMP CHECK Fair Fees for GG24” discussion and may carry the cost of higher-than-expected overhead. Community reaction is limited (one reply from owocki), calling out the high fee and suggesting a potential token-swap funding alternative contingent on policy ratification.
⏩ More details
The proposal requests $25,000 for custom platform setup, support, and operations for the EPIC Awards (Ethereum People’s Choice Awards — Powered by Pairwise), which could enable event/platform readiness but raises budget-alignment concerns relative to the “TEMP CHECK Fair Fees for GG24” discussion and may carry the cost of higher-than-expected overhead. Community reaction is limited (one reply from owocki), calling out the high fee and suggesting a potential token-swap funding alternative contingent on policy ratification.
⏩ More details
🆕 MakerDAO: PhoenixLabs requests Spell to transfer 800,000 USDS to Spark Foundation as monthly Genesis grant—no community discussion
PhoenixLabs requests the upcoming Spell include a transfer of 800,000 USDS to Spark Foundation (recipient 0x92e4629a4510AF5819d7D1601464C233599fF5ec) as the monthly grant ennoscriptment referenced in Atlas section A.2.9.1.2.2.5.4.1. \nThis action executes the agreed 3-month grant from the Genesis Capital Allocation (from TGE), costing 800,000 USDS for this month, and there has been no community discussion.
⏩ More details
PhoenixLabs requests the upcoming Spell include a transfer of 800,000 USDS to Spark Foundation (recipient 0x92e4629a4510AF5819d7D1601464C233599fF5ec) as the monthly grant ennoscriptment referenced in Atlas section A.2.9.1.2.2.5.4.1. \nThis action executes the agreed 3-month grant from the Genesis Capital Allocation (from TGE), costing 800,000 USDS for this month, and there has been no community discussion.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin proposal: Pond-powered domain to fund Ethereum AI projects via expert-judged, chatbot-updatable 6‑month milestone streaming
- Proposal to create a Pond‑powered Gitcoin domain for Ethereum projects that plan to integrate AI, using expert judges (Devansh Mehta, Bill Shi, Davide Crapis + others) to source winners, require each applicant to provide an updatable LLM/chatbot URL for conversational judging over a 6‑month period, and stream funding based on milestone-queriable chatbot updates. \n- Benefits: accelerates practical AI adoption on Ethereum, improves evaluation transparency, mentorship, and follow‑on funding; Costs/risks: excludes teams without existing LLM capability and imposes ongoing maintenance and milestone requirements; community reaction: no discussions reported.
⏩ More details
- Proposal to create a Pond‑powered Gitcoin domain for Ethereum projects that plan to integrate AI, using expert judges (Devansh Mehta, Bill Shi, Davide Crapis + others) to source winners, require each applicant to provide an updatable LLM/chatbot URL for conversational judging over a 6‑month period, and stream funding based on milestone-queriable chatbot updates. \n- Benefits: accelerates practical AI adoption on Ethereum, improves evaluation transparency, mentorship, and follow‑on funding; Costs/risks: excludes teams without existing LLM capability and imposes ongoing maintenance and milestone requirements; community reaction: no discussions reported.
⏩ More details
🆕 Uniswap Cycle 4: pay up to 15 delegates $6k/month (540k UNI total) for ≥80% voting and transparent rationales; second $3k tranche requires ≥1,000 UNI self‑delegation
Cycle 4 of the Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative is a 6‑month program paying up to 15 delegates up to $6,000/month in UNI (total budget $540,000 UNI) to reward ≥80% onchain/offchain voting participation and transparent vote rationales, with the second $3,000/month tranche conditional on maintaining ≥1,000 UNI delegated to oneself; benefits include stronger quorum, clearer incentives and accountability, while the cost is the $540,000 UNI allocation and a higher barrier for smaller/new delegates.
Community support is strong on Snapshot with 144 voters and 18,609,020.62 votes cast (For: 17,605,914.15; Against: 0; Abstain: 1,003,106.47); if passed, the Accountability Committee receives funds, a one‑week application window opens, and monthly verification/disbursements commence.
⏩ More details
Cycle 4 of the Uniswap Delegate Reward Initiative is a 6‑month program paying up to 15 delegates up to $6,000/month in UNI (total budget $540,000 UNI) to reward ≥80% onchain/offchain voting participation and transparent vote rationales, with the second $3,000/month tranche conditional on maintaining ≥1,000 UNI delegated to oneself; benefits include stronger quorum, clearer incentives and accountability, while the cost is the $540,000 UNI allocation and a higher barrier for smaller/new delegates.
Community support is strong on Snapshot with 144 voters and 18,609,020.62 votes cast (For: 17,605,914.15; Against: 0; Abstain: 1,003,106.47); if passed, the Accountability Committee receives funds, a one‑week application window opens, and monthly verification/disbursements commence.
⏩ More details
🆕 Morpho approves MIP 115: 50% MORPHO rewards for Spark USDC on Coinbase‑integrated markets, capped at $1B
- This approves MIP 115 to grant 50% of the standard MORPHO reward rate to Spark USDC deposits in Coinbase‑integrated markets, capped at total deposits of $1,000,000,000, to incentivize lending supply and accelerate adoption of the Coinbase borrow integration.
- Expected benefits are increased USDC liquidity, higher depositor yields and deeper market depth; costs are limited token incentives up to the $1B cap, and the proposal passed with strong support (10 voters, 2,862,486.62 votes cast: For 2,642,494.24; Against 0; Abstain 220,992.38).
⏩ More details
- This approves MIP 115 to grant 50% of the standard MORPHO reward rate to Spark USDC deposits in Coinbase‑integrated markets, capped at total deposits of $1,000,000,000, to incentivize lending supply and accelerate adoption of the Coinbase borrow integration.
- Expected benefits are increased USDC liquidity, higher depositor yields and deeper market depth; costs are limited token incentives up to the $1B cap, and the proposal passed with strong support (10 voters, 2,862,486.62 votes cast: For 2,642,494.24; Against 0; Abstain 220,992.38).
⏩ More details
🆕 Gnosis DAO poll: update Gnosis Pay cashback to 8% (+1% OG), 1,000 GNO eligibility, logarithmic weekly caps and 5,000 GNO budget — community largely critical
A governance poll asks whether Gnosis DAO should continue and update the Gnosis Pay Cashback Programme (GIP-131) to raise max cashback to 8% (+1% for OG NFT holders), increase eligible GNO holdings to 1,000, implement logarithmic weekly spend caps, enforce anti-gaming rules, limit the budget to 5,000 GNO (expected to run until depletion), and distribute weekly in GNO on Gnosis Chain; benefits claimed are fairer distribution, longer budget lifespan, and stronger GNO-holding incentives, while costs include a smaller budget, tighter caps, greater complexity, potential reduced attractiveness versus staking/validator returns, and risk of user churn. \nCommunity reaction across 47 replies is largely critical—members question practicality, sustainability, cap frequency, and misalignment with staking/validator incentives, and propose alternatives or broader incentives.
⏩ More details
A governance poll asks whether Gnosis DAO should continue and update the Gnosis Pay Cashback Programme (GIP-131) to raise max cashback to 8% (+1% for OG NFT holders), increase eligible GNO holdings to 1,000, implement logarithmic weekly spend caps, enforce anti-gaming rules, limit the budget to 5,000 GNO (expected to run until depletion), and distribute weekly in GNO on Gnosis Chain; benefits claimed are fairer distribution, longer budget lifespan, and stronger GNO-holding incentives, while costs include a smaller budget, tighter caps, greater complexity, potential reduced attractiveness versus staking/validator returns, and risk of user churn. \nCommunity reaction across 47 replies is largely critical—members question practicality, sustainability, cap frequency, and misalignment with staking/validator incentives, and propose alternatives or broader incentives.
⏩ More details
🆕 Proposal to apply TNFR to model GMX V2’s GLV as a coherent macronode with Python package to measure phase coherence, EPI and regime criteria
naiqun proposes applying TNFR (Theory of Resonant Fractal Nature) to model GMX V2’s GLV as a coherent macronode—with a computable mathematical framework and Python package—to measure EPI, structural frequency νf, ΔNFR, phase/alignment (ρ, Si) and regime criteria (self‑organisation, mutation, transition) and to privilege phase coherence over price-distribution assumptions. \n\nBenefits: earlier anticipation of regime changes, improved legibility and operational control complementing SHIFT; costs/risks: requires new operational practices and interpretation frameworks focused on phase alignment rather than conventional price metrics; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
naiqun proposes applying TNFR (Theory of Resonant Fractal Nature) to model GMX V2’s GLV as a coherent macronode—with a computable mathematical framework and Python package—to measure EPI, structural frequency νf, ΔNFR, phase/alignment (ρ, Si) and regime criteria (self‑organisation, mutation, transition) and to privilege phase coherence over price-distribution assumptions. \n\nBenefits: earlier anticipation of regime changes, improved legibility and operational control complementing SHIFT; costs/risks: requires new operational practices and interpretation frameworks focused on phase alignment rather than conventional price metrics; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin proposal: Butter to seed 10–15 InfoFi markets aiming 1M+ volume by 2026; community urges narrowing to 3–5 archetypes and publishing compliance, runway and measurement plans
A proposal by Butter to run a Market Discovery Program to seed 10–15 crypto information markets and scale winners toward 1,000,000+ combined non-sports/non-election market volume (and visible institutional/media usage) by early 2026 aims to validate 3–5 repeatable InfoFi market templates that could improve funding, forecasting, and governance across L2s/DAOs. Key benefits are potential shared infrastructure and better decision-making tools; key costs/risks are policy/legality hurdles, subsidy dependency, KPI gaming/manipulation, data integrity and execution risk, and the community (score 12/14) urges narrowing to 3–5 market archetypes with named partners, publishing a post-subsidy runway, compliance plan, and a rigorous measurement/resolution framework.
⏩ More details
A proposal by Butter to run a Market Discovery Program to seed 10–15 crypto information markets and scale winners toward 1,000,000+ combined non-sports/non-election market volume (and visible institutional/media usage) by early 2026 aims to validate 3–5 repeatable InfoFi market templates that could improve funding, forecasting, and governance across L2s/DAOs. Key benefits are potential shared infrastructure and better decision-making tools; key costs/risks are policy/legality hurdles, subsidy dependency, KPI gaming/manipulation, data integrity and execution risk, and the community (score 12/14) urges narrowing to 3–5 market archetypes with named partners, publishing a post-subsidy runway, compliance plan, and a rigorous measurement/resolution framework.
⏩ More details
🆕 GMX DAO proposes buying $110K/month of GT from GMX Solana (launched Mar 12, 2025) for ~12 months to fund audits, dev, infra and marketing
- A proposal requests the GMX DAO purchase $110,000 of GT from GMX Solana each month for approximately 12 months to fund GMX Solana’s growth (launched on 12 March 2025) and give the DAO long‑term GT exposure. \n- Benefits: predictable monthly funding for audits, risk, infrastructure, development and marketing and alignment with Solana expansion; costs: $110,000/month allocated (detailed line items including $51,666 for audit & risk, $43,166 for development, $9,000 infrastructure, $6,666 marketing); community reaction: no discussions yet, feedback is specifically requested on GT pricing methodology.
⏩ More details
- A proposal requests the GMX DAO purchase $110,000 of GT from GMX Solana each month for approximately 12 months to fund GMX Solana’s growth (launched on 12 March 2025) and give the DAO long‑term GT exposure. \n- Benefits: predictable monthly funding for audits, risk, infrastructure, development and marketing and alignment with Solana expansion; costs: $110,000/month allocated (detailed line items including $51,666 for audit & risk, $43,166 for development, $9,000 infrastructure, $6,666 marketing); community reaction: no discussions yet, feedback is specifically requested on GT pricing methodology.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin GG24 proposal to fund “mechanism builders” with 6‑month rollout and retroactive quadratic “value routed” redistribution — owocki broadly supportive but flags gaming, metrics and governance risks
A proposal by thedevanshmehta would create a GG24 domain funding “mechanism builders” through a 6‑month deployment window and a retroactive quadratic redistribution based on “value routed,” aiming to accelerate adoption of simple, verifiable, credibly neutral allocation mechanisms across Ethereum and to catalog/validate them for broader use. Benefits: could create production‑grade, usage‑weighted funding rails and cultural incentives to “prove it in production”; costs/risks: susceptible to gaming/wash trading, skewed rewards without rigorous metrics or normalization, governance centralization and execution risk from a single‑lead model and the 6‑month lag; community reaction is limited to one substantive assessment from owocki that is broadly supportive but requests clearer “value routed” metrics, stronger anti‑gaming safeguards, diversified governance, and tighter evaluation rubrics.
⏩ More details
A proposal by thedevanshmehta would create a GG24 domain funding “mechanism builders” through a 6‑month deployment window and a retroactive quadratic redistribution based on “value routed,” aiming to accelerate adoption of simple, verifiable, credibly neutral allocation mechanisms across Ethereum and to catalog/validate them for broader use. Benefits: could create production‑grade, usage‑weighted funding rails and cultural incentives to “prove it in production”; costs/risks: susceptible to gaming/wash trading, skewed rewards without rigorous metrics or normalization, governance centralization and execution risk from a single‑lead model and the 6‑month lag; community reaction is limited to one substantive assessment from owocki that is broadly supportive but requests clearer “value routed” metrics, stronger anti‑gaming safeguards, diversified governance, and tighter evaluation rubrics.
⏩ More details
🆕 Reserve proposal: Create "Morpho Dollar" rToken backed only by Morpho Vault tokens to target ~9% USDC-based native yield (~9%)
- Proposal to create “Morpho Dollar,” an rToken that accepts only Morpho Vault tokens as collateral and deposits exclusively into Morpho (MetaMorpho vaults) to target a USDC-based basket with native yield ~9% from lending against high-quality assets like cbBTC and wstETH, leveraging Morpho’s simple, immutable contracts to reduce smart contract upgrade risk. \n- Benefit: potentially higher, safer native yield and reduced upgrade/sovereign-risk compared with Aave/Compound exposure; Cost/Risk: concentrated single-venue exposure to Morpho and related concentration risk; Community reaction: no discussions have occurred.
⏩ More details
- Proposal to create “Morpho Dollar,” an rToken that accepts only Morpho Vault tokens as collateral and deposits exclusively into Morpho (MetaMorpho vaults) to target a USDC-based basket with native yield ~9% from lending against high-quality assets like cbBTC and wstETH, leveraging Morpho’s simple, immutable contracts to reduce smart contract upgrade risk. \n- Benefit: potentially higher, safer native yield and reduced upgrade/sovereign-risk compared with Aave/Compound exposure; Cost/Risk: concentrated single-venue exposure to Morpho and related concentration risk; Community reaction: no discussions have occurred.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin grant: fund open-source DeFi transparency/decentralization assessment framework with DeFiScan/L2Beat — reviewers ask for named experts, co-funding, and quick protocol proof-of-work
This proposes funding open-source tools, standards, and education to create a verifiable DeFi transparency and decentralization assessment framework (with bounties, sub rounds, and partners like DeFiScan/L2Beat) to drive protocol improvements and better risk comparison for users and allocators. Benefits: could become a canonical, public-good decentralization standard and steer capital toward more decentralized options; Costs/risks: reviewer supply and rigor, conflicts of interest, duplication with existing orgs, metric integrity, legal/reputational friction, and unclear expert/funder commitments — community reaction so far is one substantive structured review (Draft Scorecard 9/14, 75% confidence) calling for named experts, confirmed co-funding, a narrowed allocation mechanism, and quick proof-of-work via 5–10 announced protocol reviews.
⏩ More details
This proposes funding open-source tools, standards, and education to create a verifiable DeFi transparency and decentralization assessment framework (with bounties, sub rounds, and partners like DeFiScan/L2Beat) to drive protocol improvements and better risk comparison for users and allocators. Benefits: could become a canonical, public-good decentralization standard and steer capital toward more decentralized options; Costs/risks: reviewer supply and rigor, conflicts of interest, duplication with existing orgs, metric integrity, legal/reputational friction, and unclear expert/funder commitments — community reaction so far is one substantive structured review (Draft Scorecard 9/14, 75% confidence) calling for named experts, confirmed co-funding, a narrowed allocation mechanism, and quick proof-of-work via 5–10 announced protocol reviews.
⏩ More details
🔥1
🆕 Gitcoin proposal: create GG24 UX domain for onboarding, wallets and gasless/gasless flows — lacks named stewards, outside funding and clear metrics
The proposal \"GG24 Sensemaking Report: User Experience & Consumer Apps\" seeks to create a GG24 domain to improve onboarding, wallet UX, fee abstraction/gasless flows and consumer app exemplars, promising higher activation/retention and open‑source tools but currently lacking named stewards, outside co‑funding, clear measurement/attribution, and carries risks of fragmentation, scope creep, sybil/grant gaming, and misalignment with October deliverables. Community reaction is constructive but critical—scorecard 4/14 (confidence 65%)—with major requests to name 2–3 stewards, secure soft matching funds from one L2 and one flagship app, tighten scope to wallets/onboarding and fee abstraction, publish activation/day‑7/day‑30 metrics, and add anti‑sybil/eligibility guardrails.
⏩ More details
The proposal \"GG24 Sensemaking Report: User Experience & Consumer Apps\" seeks to create a GG24 domain to improve onboarding, wallet UX, fee abstraction/gasless flows and consumer app exemplars, promising higher activation/retention and open‑source tools but currently lacking named stewards, outside co‑funding, clear measurement/attribution, and carries risks of fragmentation, scope creep, sybil/grant gaming, and misalignment with October deliverables. Community reaction is constructive but critical—scorecard 4/14 (confidence 65%)—with major requests to name 2–3 stewards, secure soft matching funds from one L2 and one flagship app, tighten scope to wallets/onboarding and fee abstraction, publish activation/day‑7/day‑30 metrics, and add anti‑sybil/eligibility guardrails.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gnosis: proposed $40K "Gnosis Growth Fund" pilot using Gardens conviction‑voting pool and on‑chain Covenant enforcement — debate over upfront vs streamed disbursements
A GIP-Draft (created on 2025-08-14) proposes a pilot “Gnosis Growth Fund” using a Gardens conviction-voting pool to allocate $40,000 in community-directed grants (seed $10,000 upfront + $30,000 streamed over 3 months) with onchain Covenant enforcement and Gardens Core handling setup at no cost. The pilot promises low-cost, transparent, community-led funding that could boost participation and decentralization, while community reaction (6 replies, overall supportive but limited) focuses on disbursement design—some (e.g., lighthousegov.eth, paul2) argue for upfront or tranche payments to enable clearer evaluation versus streaming.
⏩ More details
A GIP-Draft (created on 2025-08-14) proposes a pilot “Gnosis Growth Fund” using a Gardens conviction-voting pool to allocate $40,000 in community-directed grants (seed $10,000 upfront + $30,000 streamed over 3 months) with onchain Covenant enforcement and Gardens Core handling setup at no cost. The pilot promises low-cost, transparent, community-led funding that could boost participation and decentralization, while community reaction (6 replies, overall supportive but limited) focuses on disbursement design—some (e.g., lighthousegov.eth, paul2) argue for upfront or tranche payments to enable clearer evaluation versus streaming.
⏩ More details
🆕 Scroll governance recap: Security Subsidy, Carroll research, Feynman mainnet upgrade and Community Council formation
A weekly governance recap for Scroll DAO (August 11–15, 2025) reports approval of the Security Subsidy Program for Scroll Builders, Carroll Mechanisms research, the Feynman Mainnet upgrade, and Community Council formation, plus ongoing calls for feedback on several council formations and a DAO timelock test; these actions aim to accelerate governance maturity, boost developer activity, and improve decision alignment but carry costs in subsidy oversight and upgrade coordination risks. Key near-term calls to action: apply to the Community Council by Monday, August 17 at 11:00 PM; submit DAO Treasury Management RFP by August 18, 2025; attend DAO & Governance calls on Wednesday, August 20, 2025 and the Role-Based Org Chart session on Thursday, August 21, 2025; there have been no community discussions to date.
⏩ More details
A weekly governance recap for Scroll DAO (August 11–15, 2025) reports approval of the Security Subsidy Program for Scroll Builders, Carroll Mechanisms research, the Feynman Mainnet upgrade, and Community Council formation, plus ongoing calls for feedback on several council formations and a DAO timelock test; these actions aim to accelerate governance maturity, boost developer activity, and improve decision alignment but carry costs in subsidy oversight and upgrade coordination risks. Key near-term calls to action: apply to the Community Council by Monday, August 17 at 11:00 PM; submit DAO Treasury Management RFP by August 18, 2025; attend DAO & Governance calls on Wednesday, August 20, 2025 and the Role-Based Org Chart session on Thursday, August 21, 2025; there have been no community discussions to date.
⏩ More details
🆕 Proposal to seed Gitcoin DevTools guild in GG24 using Protocol Guild 1% pledge model could redirect ~$1.8M of “buy alignment” funding; limited (2) replies
A proposal to seed a DevTools guild within GG24 would use Gitcoin’s brand and a Protocol Guild–style 1% pledge model to redirect “buy alignment” funding toward mature dev tooling projects, potentially raising about $1.8M if it captures 1% of Protocol Guild’s cited ~$183M donations; no costs are specified. Community reaction is limited but supportive (2 replies), with DistributedDoge urging owocki/Gitcoin to engage funds/VCs and citing precedent pledges, and no concrete next actions have been set.
⏩ More details
A proposal to seed a DevTools guild within GG24 would use Gitcoin’s brand and a Protocol Guild–style 1% pledge model to redirect “buy alignment” funding toward mature dev tooling projects, potentially raising about $1.8M if it captures 1% of Protocol Guild’s cited ~$183M donations; no costs are specified. Community reaction is limited but supportive (2 replies), with DistributedDoge urging owocki/Gitcoin to engage funds/VCs and citing precedent pledges, and no concrete next actions have been set.
⏩ More details
🆕 owocki draft scorecard gives "DeSci – Gitcoin 3.0" localism proposal 8/14, notes potential but flags cofunding, execution and measurement risks
owocki’s Draft Scorecard (Version 0.1.1, dated 2025/08/18) evaluates the “DeSci - Gitcoin 3.0 sensemaking report” proposal to run a DeSci localism round using regional partners, nominated reviewers with COI declarations, and Gitcoin infrastructure (scored 8/14, 70% confidence), finding potential to surface high‑context DeSci projects and create a repeatable playbook if anchor cofunders and layered impact tracking are secured. \nBenefits: leverages experienced regional operators and Gitcoin’s public‑goods brand; Costs/risks: execution complexity, funding/platform dependencies, measurement ambiguity, and lack of firm cofunding or a crisp research plan; community reaction (single evaluator) is constructive but asks for confirmed partners, named reviewers, a cofunding commitment, contingencies, and a clearer report outline before October gates.
⏩ More details
owocki’s Draft Scorecard (Version 0.1.1, dated 2025/08/18) evaluates the “DeSci - Gitcoin 3.0 sensemaking report” proposal to run a DeSci localism round using regional partners, nominated reviewers with COI declarations, and Gitcoin infrastructure (scored 8/14, 70% confidence), finding potential to surface high‑context DeSci projects and create a repeatable playbook if anchor cofunders and layered impact tracking are secured. \nBenefits: leverages experienced regional operators and Gitcoin’s public‑goods brand; Costs/risks: execution complexity, funding/platform dependencies, measurement ambiguity, and lack of firm cofunding or a crisp research plan; community reaction (single evaluator) is constructive but asks for confirmed partners, named reviewers, a cofunding commitment, contingencies, and a clearer report outline before October gates.
⏩ More details
🆕 CowDAO opens CoW Grants Retro Round — submit RETRO ROUND proposals (deliverables, impact metrics, timeline to year‑end, track record); retroactive funding decisions Jan 2026
CoW Grants Retro Round is open for submissions: post a “RETRO ROUND” proposal in the grants forum using the standard template and grantee guide, specify deliverables, alignment with focus areas (solver infrastructure, dev tools, MEV protection, AI agents, UX), impact metrics, timeline through the end of the year, and track record. Benefits: channels work to priority areas and rewards impactful contributions retroactively with evaluation and funding decisions scheduled for January 2026; there are no community discussions reported.
⏩ More details
CoW Grants Retro Round is open for submissions: post a “RETRO ROUND” proposal in the grants forum using the standard template and grantee guide, specify deliverables, alignment with focus areas (solver infrastructure, dev tools, MEV protection, AI agents, UX), impact metrics, timeline through the end of the year, and track record. Benefits: channels work to priority areas and rewards impactful contributions retroactively with evaluation and funding decisions scheduled for January 2026; there are no community discussions reported.
⏩ More details