Appeal of July 2023 GMC Results - Rocket Split (GA032303)

Governance
1

RPIP-18 allows anyone to file a RPIP disputing a GMC decision. This post seeks community feedback if the decision to not fund the proposal for Rocket Split (GA032303) should be appealed. I am looking for a strong signal to move forward with the challenge.

Reasoning

  • Ramana first applied for this project during the April GMC round. The GMC did not approve and asked Ramana to reapply after incorporating “mentor’s requirements”. Apparently these requirements were about the need for a frontend for the project. The July re-application appears to satisfy these requirements.
  • The GMC misunderstood the project when it decided to decline in July. The team is not working on things that would make Rocket Split obsolete. It is different than NodeSet.
  • Last but not least, I believe this is a promising project and the community has already shown some interest in the concept of marriage contracts. Making them more accessible and customizable makes a lot of sense to me.

Context

Rocket Split - April Application
April Results
Rocket Split - July Application
Juli Results
@fornax shares his perspective (Discord)
@jcrtp explains his vote (Discord)
@waqwaqattack shares his perspective (Discord)
Not every GMC member commented on the issue at the time of this post.

Sentiment Poll

Should pDAO vote on giving GA032303 the requested amount?
  • Yes, pDAO should vote on this
  • No, the GMC decision to not approve should be followed
0 voters

edit:

1 Like
2

To me, the critical point is the latest decline being based on understandings that shifted rapidly after talking.

1 Like
3

Let’s vote on this! I am happy to see how this goes, and the sentiment seems overwhelmingly in favour of a vote.

4

FWIW, I think I’ve generally been the most anti-appeal person in the pDAO (and somewhat wish we’d not added it in), but if there is going to be an appeal then this is basically what I think it should be used for.

2 Likes
5

I’m struggling on which way to vote on this.

On the one hand, it was rejected because of a misunderstanding and we have an opportunity to rectify it. On the other hand, even if we get an appeal, and win the appeal, I’d want to speak with our new GMC administrator to ensure clear deliverables and timelines. It’s clearly the function that was missing in the past.

We picked this project up because there seemed to be demand for it, we wanted to work with Ramana, and we had done some good work on asset splitter contracts and front ends in the past (https://assetrouter.com/ and https://www.r3vl.xyz/). We want to deliver this with the least disruption and most value

4 Likes
6

I believe this definitely should be challenged and I am glad we can exercise this power. We should consider making this process easier in the future.

7

Draft for RPIP-27 is up.

8

Fyi, the sentiment poll has been up 3 days and we’re eligible to open a vote at 7 days. Sentiment looks like it’s hitting “promising” with ease. All of which is to say - please review the RPIP soon :joy: