# Grant Idea - Rocket Pool Summit Program **URL:** \ **Category:** Grants / Bounties\ **Created:** [18 March 2024 20:20 UTC](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850 "2024-03-18T20:20:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ShfRyn](https://dao.rocketpool.net/user_avatar/dao.rocketpool.net/shfryn/32/531_2.png) [@ShfRyn](https://dao.rocketpool.net/u/ShfRyn)\ **Post date:** [18 March 2024 20:20 UTC](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/1 "2024-03-18T20:20:45Z")
**Proposal** Create a budget for Rocket Pool meetup events where community members can meet in approved locations (cities) twice a year, and be reimbursed up to a certain amount for their expenses. Right now ETH Denver is the primary event for the Rocket Pool community. This grant would serve to promote more in-person communication and networking throughout the year, and also give another chance for those that may have missed ETH Denver that year. Cities would need to be approved or added in order to streamline the process, encourage regular events, and cut down on administration verification. The grant would start with a list of approved cities, and community members can apply to add their city to the list. Their application would include the city, potential meeting locations, and a list of community members that have voiced interest in attending an event there. **Requirements For Reimbursement:** - Picture of check / bill - Photo of group - List of Discord handles - Event took place in approved city (or within 30 miles) - Minimum 3 members in attendance **Funding Details:** - Up to 8 community members - $50 per member - 1 event per six months Ideally this would only be for community members, the reimbursement wouldn’t cover friends, family, etc. Do you have any interest in attending these events? _Poll ([view on site](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/1))_ In what cities would you be interested in attending a Rocket Pool meetup? _Poll ([view on site](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/1))_ Please comment with any feedback or suggestions below. ---
**Author:** ![waqwaqattack](https://dao.rocketpool.net/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/w/45deac/32.png) [@waqwaqattack](https://dao.rocketpool.net/u/waqwaqattack)\ **Post date:** [18 March 2024 20:38 UTC](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/2 "2024-03-18T20:38:46Z")
This is an amazing idea! ---
**Author:** ![Snocones](https://dao.rocketpool.net/user_avatar/dao.rocketpool.net/snocones/32/1329_2.png) [@Snocones](https://dao.rocketpool.net/u/Snocones)\ **Post date:** [18 March 2024 20:51 UTC](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/3 "2024-03-18T20:51:16Z")
Love this. IMO the cap of 8 members is a little low for an event that could only occur once every six months. What do you think about starting the cap at 15 instead? ---
**Author:** ![Valdorff](https://dao.rocketpool.net/user_avatar/dao.rocketpool.net/valdorff/32/319_2.png) [@Valdorff](https://dao.rocketpool.net/u/Valdorff)\ **Post date:** [18 March 2024 22:25 UTC](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/4 "2024-03-18T22:25:38Z")
A bit of odd feedback… I think this is too formal and too causal 😂 I’d go something like: - posted 1 month ahead - 1 hour serious RP discussion with notes posted - at least 5 pDAO members there vouching for each other; GMC can ask for more verification ahead of the event if the members have no well-trusted members to anchor the event $50 per member makes sense, maybe $1k max per 6 months (no repeat people if we hit cap?). I think this level of funds is pretty chill and community is valuable. ---
**Author:** ![FeelingoodFeelingrt](https://dao.rocketpool.net/user_avatar/dao.rocketpool.net/feelingoodfeelingrt/32/725_2.png) [@FeelingoodFeelingrt](https://dao.rocketpool.net/u/FeelingoodFeelingrt)\ **Post date:** [18 March 2024 22:35 UTC](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/5 "2024-03-18T22:35:16Z")
Great idea - another location suggestion is San Francisco Bay Area ---
**Author:** ![epineph](https://dao.rocketpool.net/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/258eb7/32.png) [@epineph](https://dao.rocketpool.net/u/epineph)\ **Post date:** [19 March 2024 00:32 UTC](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/6 "2024-03-19T00:32:08Z")
So I love this. My thoughts: 1. I would fund more than two per year. I think one per month is reasonable with wide geographic distribution. Maybe unreasonable concern, but I don’t want this to be only used by the 16 ‘cool kids’ of RP (you know who you are). 2. I think 50/person is reasonable; the more meetups you have the less distance people would need to travel to get to one. 3. I’m not sure if the cap of 8 is optimal or not; can see arguing for more inclusive (cap 20) but likely would be diminishing returns with that size for genuine discussions. 4. I still like a system of 1) buy POAP for deposit to attend 2) get refunded for entire POAP cost +50 dollars if you attend. 5. I think the cities shouldn’t be decided now; would prefer the anchor person get enough support for a city and then let the GMC know it’s on. Like, why shouldn’t Seoul be in the running if there’s a core group there? ---
**Author:** ![ShfRyn](https://dao.rocketpool.net/user_avatar/dao.rocketpool.net/shfryn/32/531_2.png) [@ShfRyn](https://dao.rocketpool.net/u/ShfRyn)\ **Post date:** [20 March 2024 17:31 UTC](https://dao.rocketpool.net/t/grant-idea-rocket-pool-summit-program/2850/7 "2024-03-20T17:31:53Z")
> [@Snocones](#): > > IMO the cap of 8 members is a little low for an event that could only occur once every six months. What do you think about starting the cap at 15 instead? Yeah I didn’t put too much thought into that what a realistic cap is. I just went with a cap so it didn’t get out of hand. 15 sounds good. Or we could go with a cap after we see the turnout for the first few events, and give a reasonable cushion for growth. > [@Valdorff](#): > > I’d go something like: > > - posted 1 month ahead > - 1 hour serious RP discussion with notes posted > - at least 5 pDAO members there vouching for each other; GMC can ask for more verification ahead of the event if the members have no well-trusted members to anchor the event > > $50 per member makes sense, maybe $1k max per 6 months (no repeat people if we hit cap?). I think this level of funds is pretty chill and community is valuable. I like the idea of advertising them by posting the one month ahead to make them more inclusive. I think the 1 hour serious RP discussion might be a bit overkill? I can see value in the summit organizer taking / posting notes though. That could be a requirement for the organizer. I figured the photo would be a good way to vouch for each other, it also is just generally good for engagement. The vouching could be a backup if the group forgets to take a photo. > [@FeelingoodFeelingrt](#): > > Great idea - another location suggestion is San Francisco Bay Area Sounds great, I was looking for West Coast location ideas. > [@epineph](#): > > I would fund more than two per year. I think one per month is reasonable with wide geographic distribution. Maybe unreasonable concern, but I don’t want this to be only used by the 16 ‘cool kids’ of RP (you know who you are). My intention was max 2 per year for each location. > [@epineph](#): > > I still like a system of 1) buy POAP for deposit to attend 2) get refunded for entire POAP cost +50 dollars if you attend. I’m not opposed to this. Could be a great way to bring structure to the system. However, if the summit program does expand (several to a dozen+ events a year) it might be difficult to get each group to administer the POAP component. > [@epineph](#): > > I think the cities shouldn’t be decided now; would prefer the anchor person get enough support for a city and then let the GMC know it’s on. Like, why shouldn’t Seoul be in the running if there’s a core group there? You could do it two ways: - You can start with a list of cities, and add more as people apply. This would take more organizational work upfront, reaching out to inquire for people to participate. - You could start from scratch and have people apply. I suppose it makes more sense to start from scratch, that way you’re not forcing anyone to commit to the organizer role.