RPIP Feedback Contribution
General Information
What is the nature of the proposed bounty?
The idea here is to reward individuals for contributing useful (as judged by the RPIP author) feedback to an accepted RPIP in a forum setting.
Why are you writing this bounty proposal?
Feedback on RPIPs is extremely valuable. It challenges the author, and almost always leads to RPIPs that are more clear and better thought out.
It’s currently hard to get feedback on most RPIPs, especially when they concern issues that are not central to the community. One can argue this is good, and that the community should not be spending time on what they aren’t interested in, but I think this is shortsighted. Some RPIPs are important without being interesting, and it can be more important to get robust feedback on these.
Benefit
| Group | Benefits |
|---|---|
| Potential rETH holders | No direct benefit. |
| rETH holders | Indirect benefit of more thoroughly vetted proposals that may affect rETH. |
| Potential NOs | No direct benefit. |
| NOs | Rules and structures that have had wider and more varied input are likely to be better suited to what the community wants from their DAO. More effective feedback may make it easier for voters to understand the tradeoffs within a proposal. |
| Community | Rules and structures that have had wider and more varied input are likely to be better suited to what the community wants from their DAO. |
| RPL holders | Indirect benefit of better rules and structure within the RP DAOs, potentially contributing to a higher valuation of RPL. |
Which other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals would stand to benefit from the bounty being successfully completed?
Other DAOs can learn by example, and adopt similar structures and methods as those adopted by Rocket Pool. If those structures are stronger due to this bounty, it could indirectly benefit other DAOs and protocols.
It may also benefit more ‘governance-focused’ entities in the space that currently act as delegates on other protocols.
Work
What steps would be entailed in completing the bounty? Do successful examples of such work exist elsewhere? What skillsets or knowledge will be required?
The bounty would be completed by members of the community contributing and debating the contents of draft RPIPs as part of the RPIP discussion thread that must be posted on the RP forum. In practice, this would look like commentary that the RPIP author feels is useful when the RPIP is moved to either Final or Living status. For the bounty to be paid out, the RPIP must either:
- Pass a token-weighted vote of the Rocket Pool DAO.
- Be accepted by the RPIP editors as a Living Informational RPIP.
Examples of work like this appear irregularly on some of the past RPIP discussion threads.
No domain-specific skillset is required here. Just general comprehension and critical thinking applied to draft proposals.
What advice would you give a bounty hunter working on this bounty?
- Challenge the RPIP author on their assumptions.
- Avoid overly discouraging the RPIP author, you don’t get the bounty if the RPIP is not accepted, which it won’t be if the author bails.
- Contribute actionable feedback that makes it easy for the author to react to your input.
Should the output of this bounty be available under an open-source license?
Not strictly applicable. I’m unsure how forum posts are licensed.
Costs
How much do you think the completion of this bounty is worth to Rocket Pool (in USD)?
I think it’s difficult to accurately price this in aggregate on the Rocket Pool side, and don’t think it’s necessary to do so, as there is a natural limit to how many people can provide useful feedback on a given item before it stops being useful. RPIPs are also fairly infrequent, limiting the cost. The requirement for RPIPs to be adopted by the pDAO (if voted) or RPIP editors (if Living Informational) before bounty payout also limits the cost and reduces the likelihood of spam.
I think the GMC should allocate a pool of $3000 a month to this bounty, but I consider this a sanity check and extremely unlikely to be hit under normal circumstances.
Suggested figures per level of contribution are suggested in a later section.
How much work will be needed to verify this bounty has been completed? What skillsets or knowledge will be required?
No significant work on the part of the GMC is required here. No uncommon skillsets or knowledge are required.
Minor administrative work should cover:
- Coordination with the RPIP author after an RPIP passes to confirm whose feedback they found useful, and to what degree.
- Sanity Check of the RPIP forum thread to confirm RPIP author’s input is accurate.
- Sanity Check of the RPIP forum thread to confirm the RPIP author is not unfairly excluding contributing community members.
- Payouts to those who provided feedback and claim this bounty.
Some of this administrative work could fall to RPIP editors, depending on the GMC’s appetite for it.
Structure
How would you structure this bounty, and why?
I think contributions should be rewarded on the following scale:
- Unusable or shallow feedback: $0
- A small amount of useful feedback, limited to a specific area of the RPIP: $40
- A moderate amount of useful feedback: $80
- A large amount of useful feedback, covering multiple areas of the RPIP: $160
- Critical feedback that significantly changed the author’s approach: $250
I don’t think it’s necessary to divide this into milestones. This bounty should have multiple payouts.
Is this bounty repeatable?
Yes. It’s intended to be evergreen and repeatable by the same individuals on different RPIPs.
A bounty hunter should receive only one payout for each RPIP to which they contribute feedback.
Are there any reasonable circumstances under which this bounty should be withdrawn? Should it expire?
It should not expire.
It should be withdrawn or adjusted if we start to see spam RPIPs and/or spam feedback.
Conflicts of Interest
Does the person or persons proposing the bounty have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if any member of the GMC would benefit directly financially from the successful completion of the bounty).
I am not a member of the GMC. GMC members could benefit from this bounty by providing feedback to RPIPs and should feel free to do so, the same as any other community member.
Will the applicant, or any protocol or project in which the applicant has a vested interest (other than Rocket Pool), benefit financially if the bounty is successfully completed?
Effectively no.
There is a chance that if Rocket Pool develops a proven-effective structure or set of RPIPs, then I will attempt to implement similar systems in other protocols, likely hoping for compensation at those protocols.
RPIP Feedback Contribution
Data
- Repeatable? Yes
- Expiring? No
- Skillsets for completion? General Writing, Review
- Relevant tags? Governance
- Min reward (USD)? $40
- Max reward (USD)? $250
- Any linked definitions? (e.g. if a single bounty proposal becomes multiple definitions.) No.
- Any dependencies? Requires a draft RPIP which is later adopted.
Summary
Contribute useful feedback to a draft RPIP that is later ratified by Rocket Pool token holders, or accepted by RPIP Editors as a Living Informational RPIP.
Dependencies
This bounty requires a draft RPIP for which feedback is being sought on the Rocket Pool forum. Consult the proposed RPIPs and informational RPIPs sections of the RPIPs portal for drafts.
Requirements
- You must contribute feedback to a draft RPIP on that RPIPs linked discussion thread on the Rocket Pool forum.
- Feedback must be rendered in a polite and collaborative manner.
- For this bounty to be claimed for an RPIP, the RPIP in question must be either:
- Marked as Living Informational by RPIP Editors.
- Pass a token-weighted vote of the Rocket Pool pDAO.
The bounty will be paid out at the following tiers, judged by the author(s) of the RPIP.
- Unusable or shallow feedback: $0
- A small amount of useful feedback, limited to a specific area of the RPIP: $40
- A moderate amount of useful feedback: $80
- A large amount of useful feedback, covering multiple areas of the RPIP: $160
- Critical feedback that significantly changed the author’s approach: $250
Further Notes
The goal here is to improve the strength and effectiveness of RPIPs in the Rocket Pool DAO and to indirectly strengthen the community’s ability to create effective RPIPs.
General suggestions to those providing feedback include:
- Challenge the RPIP author on their assumptions.
- Contribute actionable feedback that makes it easy for the author to react to your input.
- Avoid overly discouraging the RPIP author, you don’t get the bounty if the RPIP is not accepted, which it won’t be if the author never finishes it.
Verification
No special skills should be needed to verify feedback provided by bounty hunters meets the thresholds described in the requirements section. Authors will know which feedback has helped them, and which has not. The GMC can verify in short order that both the bounty hunter and RPIP author are approaching this in good faith by reading through the public RPIP thread.
Claims on this bounty should be directed to the GMC Administrator.
Resources
- Official Forum - Governance Category
- RPIP Portal - Proposed Category
- RPIP Portal - Informational Category
Contacts
I’m unsure if support contacts are needed here. I’m happy to act as a contact if the GMC sees some benefit in it. @LongForWisdom on Discord or the forum would be preferable, I don’t reliably check messages on GitHub.