Background
In past discussions, the idea of creating a formal budget for the GMC generated mixed feedback. Many members supported the idea of clarifying priorities, but there were strong concerns about rigidity, added administrative burden, and the challenges of managing a volatile treasury (especially given RPL price fluctuations).
To address these concerns, the committee agreed to experiment with a lightweight, flexible approach to surface collective priorities. This informal committee poll is designed to guide grant discussions and help ensure that high-impact areas receive appropriate attention — without imposing hard limits or strict funding allocations.
How it worked
Members could list any number of categories they believe deserve funding priority this coming quarter. Each category listed was given equal weight — this was not a ranked-choice system.
Results
| Category | Count |
|---|---|
| Marketing | 8 |
| Development | 6 |
| Research | 4 |
| Governance | 3 |
| Public Goods | 1 |
| Support | 1 |
Key Takeaways
- Marketing received the strongest support, highlighting the community’s focus on accelerating rETH adoption and expanding Rocket Pool’s visibility.
- Development was also a major priority, reinforcing the importance of ongoing protocol improvements and technical infrastructure.
- Research and Governance received moderate support, signaling continued but less immediate focus.
- Public Goods and Support were lower priorities this quarter.
Next steps
This poll is non-binding and purely advisory. Its goal is to provide context for Q3 grant and funding discussions, helping the GMC make more informed, community-aligned decisions.
We’ll revisit this process at the end of the quarter to evaluate its usefulness and decide whether to continue, adjust, or expand it in future cycles.
If you’d like to share feedback or suggest improvements to this approach, please comment below!