🆕 Driftcoin unveils "Drift Escapes" — immersive Web3 tourism with modular pods, Drift Academy education, and smart contract targeting OP Mainnet and Base
Driftcoin is launching \"Drift Escapes,\" an immersive tourism project combining modular pods, creator economies, and a crypto-powered ecosystem where DriftCoin governs access, rewards, and youth education via a Drift Academy, with its smart contract in development and launch options being evaluated on OP Mainnet and Base. Benefits include new Web3 tourism use cases, community engagement, and youth onboarding through education; they plan to apply for an Audit Grant and are seeking ASPs, stewards, and builders, and there have been no community discussions to date.
⏩ More details
Driftcoin is launching \"Drift Escapes,\" an immersive tourism project combining modular pods, creator economies, and a crypto-powered ecosystem where DriftCoin governs access, rewards, and youth education via a Drift Academy, with its smart contract in development and launch options being evaluated on OP Mainnet and Base. Benefits include new Web3 tourism use cases, community engagement, and youth onboarding through education; they plan to apply for an Audit Grant and are seeking ASPs, stewards, and builders, and there have been no community discussions to date.
⏩ More details
🆕 ENS proposes 6‑month "Contract Naming Season" with $75k USDC + up to 10k ENS to incentivize smart contract/DAO naming; early positive but limited response (3 replies)
Proposal for a 6‑month \"ENS Contract Naming Season\" to drive smart contract/protocol/DAO naming via an integration leaderboard, outreach and retroactive incentives, with a budget of $75,000 USDC for operations plus up to 10,000 ENS for awards; expected benefits are broader ENS adoption across Dapps, L2s, wallets and standards uptake, while costs are operational expenses and token incentives. \nCommunity reaction is early and positive but limited in volume (3 replies), with contributors urging urgent focus on high‑usage contracts and practical onboarding; next steps are WG/forum discussions, an on‑chain DAO vote, monthly grant reviews, and a final assessment at the end of the 6‑month program.
⏩ More details
Proposal for a 6‑month \"ENS Contract Naming Season\" to drive smart contract/protocol/DAO naming via an integration leaderboard, outreach and retroactive incentives, with a budget of $75,000 USDC for operations plus up to 10,000 ENS for awards; expected benefits are broader ENS adoption across Dapps, L2s, wallets and standards uptake, while costs are operational expenses and token incentives. \nCommunity reaction is early and positive but limited in volume (3 replies), with contributors urging urgent focus on high‑usage contracts and practical onboarding; next steps are WG/forum discussions, an on‑chain DAO vote, monthly grant reviews, and a final assessment at the end of the 6‑month program.
⏩ More details
🆕 Superfluid proposal: turn ETHx/USDCx into yielding assets to fund SUP buybacks/rewards — ~$90K/yr now, ~2 engineering weeks, no community discussion
- Proposal to upgrade ETHx and USDCx into “yielding assets” so their yield funds SUP buybacks and rewards, aiming to grow ETHx/USDCx TVL and create a SUP flywheel; expected immediate revenue of ~$90K/year from current holdings. \n- Costs are mainly engineering (estimated 2 engineering weeks) and execution/strategy risk from selecting yield sources and a future management partner; there have been no community discussions.
⏩ More details
- Proposal to upgrade ETHx and USDCx into “yielding assets” so their yield funds SUP buybacks and rewards, aiming to grow ETHx/USDCx TVL and create a SUP flywheel; expected immediate revenue of ~$90K/year from current holdings. \n- Costs are mainly engineering (estimated 2 engineering weeks) and execution/strategy risk from selecting yield sources and a future management partner; there have been no community discussions.
⏩ More details
🆕 ZKsync Foundation proposes 25,000,000 ZK Prividium Roadshow to fund Tier‑1 conference sponsorships and institutional activations (Q3‑2025–Q4‑2026)
The ZKsync Foundation proposes the Prividium Roadshow to allocate 25,000,000 ZK (about $1.25M at $0.05/ZK) from the Token Governor Timelock to fund Tier‑1 conference sponsorships and curated institutional activations from Q3‑2025 through Q4‑2026, with a 15M/10M ZK split, a ~10% reserve, reimbursements via a 3/5 multisig, biannual public reporting, and unused tokens returning to the Timelock. Expected benefits are increased brand visibility and institutional leads; costs and risks include the 25M ZK expenditure, excluded travel/accommodation, and the need for strong forum oversight of multisig reimbursements and category flexibility; there have been no community discussions.
⏩ More details
The ZKsync Foundation proposes the Prividium Roadshow to allocate 25,000,000 ZK (about $1.25M at $0.05/ZK) from the Token Governor Timelock to fund Tier‑1 conference sponsorships and curated institutional activations from Q3‑2025 through Q4‑2026, with a 15M/10M ZK split, a ~10% reserve, reimbursements via a 3/5 multisig, biannual public reporting, and unused tokens returning to the Timelock. Expected benefits are increased brand visibility and institutional leads; costs and risks include the 25M ZK expenditure, excluded travel/accommodation, and the need for strong forum oversight of multisig reimbursements and category flexibility; there have been no community discussions.
⏩ More details
🆕 dYdX Token Sender open-sourced: batch-distribute tokens across dYdX chain, Cosmos Hub and Osmosis via single CSV with no service fees
The dYdX Token Sender is an open-source web app (built with dYdX Grants support) that lets teams batch-distribute tokens to hundreds of recipients across Cosmos-based chains (dYdX chain, Cosmos Hub, Osmosis) via a single CSV upload. Benefits: faster, low-friction multi-network distributions and community-auditable code; costs: only standard network gas fees (no service fees); community reaction so far is positive but limited, with two replies praising the multi-network support and UI.
⏩ More details
The dYdX Token Sender is an open-source web app (built with dYdX Grants support) that lets teams batch-distribute tokens to hundreds of recipients across Cosmos-based chains (dYdX chain, Cosmos Hub, Osmosis) via a single CSV upload. Benefits: faster, low-friction multi-network distributions and community-auditable code; costs: only standard network gas fees (no service fees); community reaction so far is positive but limited, with two replies praising the multi-network support and UI.
⏩ More details
🆕 gmx distributions disrupted by "Smart wallet turned off" error, blocking payouts while devs investigate
- A user reports being unable to receive compensation via Distributions due to a “Smart wallet turned off.” error, which is preventing at least one payout and causing a temporary disruption. \n- Community engagement is limited but responsive: developers are investigating and working on a fix so normal payouts should be restored once resolved.
⏩ More details
- A user reports being unable to receive compensation via Distributions due to a “Smart wallet turned off.” error, which is preventing at least one payout and causing a temporary disruption. \n- Community engagement is limited but responsive: developers are investigating and working on a fix so normal payouts should be restored once resolved.
⏩ More details
🆕 Lido proposal: $60k from LEGO (DUCK FLAP) to subsidize SOC2/ISO27001-style ValOS assessments for four node operators, paid in DAI, unused funds returned
- Proposal to allocate $60,000 from LEGO (DUCK FLAP grant pool) to subsidize external SOC2/ISO27001-style ValOS assurance assessments for four early-adopter Node Operators, covering external audit, compliance uplift consulting, and tooling (operators fund internal work); unused funds will be returned to the Lido DAO Treasury and payment is to be made in DAI (0x1b28728B06BEEd3a5363DA146B59dB372bbAd047). \n\n- Benefits: improves institutional credibility, strengthens validator operational practices, and validates the ValOS framework; cost: $60,000 total subsidy; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
- Proposal to allocate $60,000 from LEGO (DUCK FLAP grant pool) to subsidize external SOC2/ISO27001-style ValOS assurance assessments for four early-adopter Node Operators, covering external audit, compliance uplift consulting, and tooling (operators fund internal work); unused funds will be returned to the Lido DAO Treasury and payment is to be made in DAI (0x1b28728B06BEEd3a5363DA146B59dB372bbAd047). \n\n- Benefits: improves institutional credibility, strengthens validator operational practices, and validates the ValOS framework; cost: $60,000 total subsidy; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
🆕 Arbitrum launches DRIP Season One: 24M ARB across 10 epochs to boost leverage-looping; liquidity and inclusion concerns
- DRIP Season One is an Arbitrum incentive program running from September 3, 2025 to January 20, 2026 (claims via Merkl until April 30, 2026) that allocates 16,000,000 ARB (base) + 8,000,000 ARB (discretionary) across 10 two‑week epochs to grow leverage-looping of yield-bearing ETH and stable assets, with phased, performance‑based rewards, public dashboards, and monitoring by Entropy. \n- Benefits include increased borrow/lend optionality, new yield asset listings, higher supply caps/LTVs, and early net-new minting and borrowing growth, while costs/risks are liquidation and smart‑contract exposure; community feedback (two main replies) applauds the structural focus but flags limited DEX liquidity for larger trades and perceived exclusion of smaller protocols, urging LP incentives, native mint/redemption, clearer applicant transparency, and faster follow‑on seasons.
⏩ More details
- DRIP Season One is an Arbitrum incentive program running from September 3, 2025 to January 20, 2026 (claims via Merkl until April 30, 2026) that allocates 16,000,000 ARB (base) + 8,000,000 ARB (discretionary) across 10 two‑week epochs to grow leverage-looping of yield-bearing ETH and stable assets, with phased, performance‑based rewards, public dashboards, and monitoring by Entropy. \n- Benefits include increased borrow/lend optionality, new yield asset listings, higher supply caps/LTVs, and early net-new minting and borrowing growth, while costs/risks are liquidation and smart‑contract exposure; community feedback (two main replies) applauds the structural focus but flags limited DEX liquidity for larger trades and perceived exclusion of smaller protocols, urging LP incentives, native mint/redemption, clearer applicant transparency, and faster follow‑on seasons.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin proposal for Public Goods R&D GG24 (Oct 2025) requests $332,500 to fund two programs; $105K confirmed, $200K match anticipated
- This is a proposal for the Public Goods R&D GG24 Domain to run in October 2025, funding two programs (Mechanism Design for Public Goods and PG Tooling Development) with a total target budget of $332,500 (about $150K target post‑fees per program), $105,000 confirmed funding, an anticipated $200,000 Gitcoin match, $25,000 still to raise, and $20,000 pending governance from 1Hive and PublicNouns. \n- Benefits: aims to catalyze rigorous, interoperable R&D using peer‑reviewed hypercerts, prediction markets, Conviction Voting/Retro Rewards and on‑chain evaluability to improve accountability and adoption; costs: ~10% allocated for ops/comms/fair fees and remaining fundraising of $25,000; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
- This is a proposal for the Public Goods R&D GG24 Domain to run in October 2025, funding two programs (Mechanism Design for Public Goods and PG Tooling Development) with a total target budget of $332,500 (about $150K target post‑fees per program), $105,000 confirmed funding, an anticipated $200,000 Gitcoin match, $25,000 still to raise, and $20,000 pending governance from 1Hive and PublicNouns. \n- Benefits: aims to catalyze rigorous, interoperable R&D using peer‑reviewed hypercerts, prediction markets, Conviction Voting/Retro Rewards and on‑chain evaluability to improve accountability and adoption; costs: ~10% allocated for ops/comms/fair fees and remaining fundraising of $25,000; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
🆕 LuukDAO proposes $432.5K "Targeted Development & Adoption" GG24 Gitcoin domain — $200K dev, $150K local funding, $82.5K reforestation, hybrid allocation and on‑chain verification
LuukDAO proposes the Targeted Development & Adoption (TDA) GG24 Domain to allocate $432,500 across three programs—Solution Development ($200,000), Local Funding ($150,000), and Bioregional Reforestation ($82,500)—during Gitcoin Grants GG24 (scheduled for October 2025) using Dedicated Domains, hybrid allocation mechanisms (Conviction Voting + Impact Retro), and onchain verification tools (KarmaGAP, Hypercerts v2, EAS, etc.). \nBenefits: targeted SDG-aligned onchain development, strengthened regional onboarding, and verifiable reforestation outcomes; costs: ~$42,500 domain fees (~10%) and $250,000 requested Gitcoin match with $160,000 already raised and $25,000 still to fund; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
LuukDAO proposes the Targeted Development & Adoption (TDA) GG24 Domain to allocate $432,500 across three programs—Solution Development ($200,000), Local Funding ($150,000), and Bioregional Reforestation ($82,500)—during Gitcoin Grants GG24 (scheduled for October 2025) using Dedicated Domains, hybrid allocation mechanisms (Conviction Voting + Impact Retro), and onchain verification tools (KarmaGAP, Hypercerts v2, EAS, etc.). \nBenefits: targeted SDG-aligned onchain development, strengthened regional onboarding, and verifiable reforestation outcomes; costs: ~$42,500 domain fees (~10%) and $250,000 requested Gitcoin match with $160,000 already raised and $25,000 still to fund; community reaction: no discussions to date.
⏩ More details
❤1
🆕 Rocketpool proposal: 54,683.16 RPL (5% inflation) on‑chain transfer to fund 2025 core team, sentiment poll may require extra reporting
cKuzzle proposed funding the 2025 core team at 5% of RPL inflation with an on-chain transfer of 54,683.16 RPL to 0xd2A4848a6644749e652c1D9398B5AA317f57395B covering October 25th 2025 to October 24th 2026, and a sentiment poll will offer immediate support, support contingent on additional team financial reporting, or opposition to moving on-chain. \nBenefits: predictable, metric‑linked funding and potential improved transparency; Costs: possible delay to the on‑chain transfer and operations if the pDAO requires more reporting; community reaction is limited (1 reply) favoring some extra due diligence.
⏩ More details
cKuzzle proposed funding the 2025 core team at 5% of RPL inflation with an on-chain transfer of 54,683.16 RPL to 0xd2A4848a6644749e652c1D9398B5AA317f57395B covering October 25th 2025 to October 24th 2026, and a sentiment poll will offer immediate support, support contingent on additional team financial reporting, or opposition to moving on-chain. \nBenefits: predictable, metric‑linked funding and potential improved transparency; Costs: possible delay to the on‑chain transfer and operations if the pDAO requires more reporting; community reaction is limited (1 reply) favoring some extra due diligence.
⏩ More details
🆕 Gitcoin proposal to pre-ratify GG24 domains and pre-approve $1.255M matching (≈55% co-funding) to fund 4–5 domains with conditional 80% threshold
MathildaDV proposes pre-ratifying GG24 Domains and pre-approving Gitcoin matching funds of $1,255,000 (with anticipated co-funding $695,000, ~55% co-funding) via Dedicated Domain Allocation and the Domain Operator Success Program to streamline funding into 4–5 domains, with Gitcoin handling QF payouts and conditional matching that can be reduced if a Domain raises less than 80% of its goal or has operational issues. \nBenefits: coordinated, leveraged co-funding and streamlined operations; costs/risks: potential narrowing of scope (e.g., AI Builders, Privacy omitted) and execution risk from the 80% conditional threshold; community reaction is limited but generally supportive (notably owocki endorses the co-funding ratio and leans “Yes”).
⏩ More details
MathildaDV proposes pre-ratifying GG24 Domains and pre-approving Gitcoin matching funds of $1,255,000 (with anticipated co-funding $695,000, ~55% co-funding) via Dedicated Domain Allocation and the Domain Operator Success Program to streamline funding into 4–5 domains, with Gitcoin handling QF payouts and conditional matching that can be reduced if a Domain raises less than 80% of its goal or has operational issues. \nBenefits: coordinated, leveraged co-funding and streamlined operations; costs/risks: potential narrowing of scope (e.g., AI Builders, Privacy omitted) and execution risk from the 80% conditional threshold; community reaction is limited but generally supportive (notably owocki endorses the co-funding ratio and leans “Yes”).
⏩ More details
🆕 Gauntlet recommends depositing 28,125 COMP into Compound Ethereum rewards contract to top up 16,061.02 COMP and extend incentive runway ~3 months, preserving 312.5 COMP/day
Gauntlet recommends depositing 28,125 COMP into the Ethereum rewards contract to top up current holdings (16,061.02 COMP) and extend the incentive runway by approximately three months, preserving the current 312.5 COMP/day distribution and avoiding an interruption. \nThis costs 28,125 COMP and the community has not yet discussed or reacted to the proposal.
⏩ More details
Gauntlet recommends depositing 28,125 COMP into the Ethereum rewards contract to top up current holdings (16,061.02 COMP) and extend the incentive runway by approximately three months, preserving the current 312.5 COMP/day distribution and avoiding an interruption. \nThis costs 28,125 COMP and the community has not yet discussed or reacted to the proposal.
⏩ More details
❤1
🆕 nethermind (grant-funded by dYdX Grants) proposes cutting dYdX fee tiers from 9 to 7, replacing market-share rules with linear volume tiers ($50M/$100M/$200M), expected ~$80k/month cost, on-chain proposal possible Sep 18, 2025
nethermind (grant-funded by dYdX Grants) proposes simplifying dYdX fee tiers from 9 to 7, removing market/exchange share requirements and replacing them with linear, volume-based tiers (new tiers at $50M, $100M, $200M volumes with maker/taker rates as specified) to lower entry barriers for market makers and boost liquidity and competitiveness. Expected benefit is deeper liquidity and clearer progression; estimated short-term cost is about $80,000/month affecting ~30 accounts (based on August data), the community has had no discussions so far, and an on-chain proposal may be submitted on September 18, 2025 if there is no significant objection.
⏩ More details
nethermind (grant-funded by dYdX Grants) proposes simplifying dYdX fee tiers from 9 to 7, removing market/exchange share requirements and replacing them with linear, volume-based tiers (new tiers at $50M, $100M, $200M volumes with maker/taker rates as specified) to lower entry barriers for market makers and boost liquidity and competitiveness. Expected benefit is deeper liquidity and clearer progression; estimated short-term cost is about $80,000/month affecting ~30 accounts (based on August data), the community has had no discussions so far, and an on-chain proposal may be submitted on September 18, 2025 if there is no significant objection.
⏩ More details
🆕 Optimism Grants Council Cycle 41: 1 approved (200k OP), 1 declined, 17 under review; tooling and AI upgrades aim to speed reviews, ~6.09M OP remaining
Cycle 41 Grants Council Report (first under Season 8) summarizes results: 1 application approved (40acres.finance — 200,000 OP), 1 declined (Intraverse — 30,000 OP), 17 applications in review, with 2,969,998 OP requested, 200,000 OP approved, Season 8 budget 6,290,000 OP and ~6.09M OP remaining. \nBenefits: process/tooling upgrades (Karma GAP migration, opgrants.io, milestone tracking) and AI-assisted filtering aim to improve review quality and efficiency; costs: conservative approvals slow immediate capital deployment; community reaction: no discussions.
⏩ More details
Cycle 41 Grants Council Report (first under Season 8) summarizes results: 1 application approved (40acres.finance — 200,000 OP), 1 declined (Intraverse — 30,000 OP), 17 applications in review, with 2,969,998 OP requested, 200,000 OP approved, Season 8 budget 6,290,000 OP and ~6.09M OP remaining. \nBenefits: process/tooling upgrades (Karma GAP migration, opgrants.io, milestone tracking) and AI-assisted filtering aim to improve review quality and efficiency; costs: conservative approvals slow immediate capital deployment; community reaction: no discussions.
⏩ More details
🆕 Proposal: Uniswap DAO to recognise canonical v3 on Plasma, transfer v3 ownership, use Wormhole for cross‑chain governance, approve $250k UNI while Plasma offers up to $5M XPL incentives
- Proposal for the Uniswap DAO to recognise and authorise a canonical Uniswap v3 Core and Periphery deployment on Plasma, designate Wormhole as the cross-chain governance messenger, transfer Uniswap v3 contract ownership to the Uniswap DAO, and approve $250,000 in UNI from the UAC discretionary fund for six months to be coordinated via the Uniswap Growth Program and Merkl, while Plasma commits up to $5,000,000 in XPL incentives over six months and provides front-end/integration support. \n- Benefit: boots liquidity for key stablecoin pairs and standardises cross-chain governance; Cost/Risk: UNI matching ($41,600/month) is conditional on Plasma distributing ≥$500,000/month (no matching if a month falls below that threshold); Community reaction: no discussions reported.
⏩ More details
- Proposal for the Uniswap DAO to recognise and authorise a canonical Uniswap v3 Core and Periphery deployment on Plasma, designate Wormhole as the cross-chain governance messenger, transfer Uniswap v3 contract ownership to the Uniswap DAO, and approve $250,000 in UNI from the UAC discretionary fund for six months to be coordinated via the Uniswap Growth Program and Merkl, while Plasma commits up to $5,000,000 in XPL incentives over six months and provides front-end/integration support. \n- Benefit: boots liquidity for key stablecoin pairs and standardises cross-chain governance; Cost/Risk: UNI matching ($41,600/month) is conditional on Plasma distributing ≥$500,000/month (no matching if a month falls below that threshold); Community reaction: no discussions reported.
⏩ More details
🆕 gEURO requests $50k from GnosisDAO to launch €1 stablecoin on Gnosis Chain (Liquity V2 fork) — 75% of borrowing fees to holders, GnosisDAO gets protocol revenue share + 15% of future token
gEURO requests a $50,000 GnosisDAO grant to fund audit and legal work for a €1.00-pegged CDP stablecoin on Gnosis Chain (Liquity V2 fork by RaidGuild) that uses sDAI/wstETH/GNO/osGNO/WBTC collateral, NFT vaults, user-set interest rates, and a revenue split that gives 75% of borrowing fees to gEURO holders while granting GnosisDAO a protocol revenue share plus 15% of any future governance token. Benefits: creates a native, yield-bearing euro stablecoin that deepens GNO utility, integrates with Gnosis Pay/RWAs/Circles and aims to drive TVL (target $25M) and on-chain euro settlement; costs: $50k upfront grant and allocation of future token/revenue share to GnosisDAO; community reaction: vote shows early positive support (For 15,069.47; Against 0; Abstain 0; 10 voters) but is far from the 75,000 quorum.
⏩ More details
gEURO requests a $50,000 GnosisDAO grant to fund audit and legal work for a €1.00-pegged CDP stablecoin on Gnosis Chain (Liquity V2 fork by RaidGuild) that uses sDAI/wstETH/GNO/osGNO/WBTC collateral, NFT vaults, user-set interest rates, and a revenue split that gives 75% of borrowing fees to gEURO holders while granting GnosisDAO a protocol revenue share plus 15% of any future governance token. Benefits: creates a native, yield-bearing euro stablecoin that deepens GNO utility, integrates with Gnosis Pay/RWAs/Circles and aims to drive TVL (target $25M) and on-chain euro settlement; costs: $50k upfront grant and allocation of future token/revenue share to GnosisDAO; community reaction: vote shows early positive support (For 15,069.47; Against 0; Abstain 0; 10 voters) but is far from the 75,000 quorum.
⏩ More details