Round 17 - GMC Community Discussion of Submitted Applications

Grants / Bounties
,
1

In order to keep the application threads clear of discussions (to make it easier for committee members to read and score them), please use this thread for any and all questions and discussions of round 17 period of grant, bounty, and retrospective award applications.

2

Bounties

rETH Growth Incubator

I was skeptical but the previous incubator was great. I support this one as well.

GMC members should not be restricted because we have some smart people on the GMC and they may have good ideas.

Grants

rETH Growth Incubator Review

I support this. I tried reviewing the submissions of the previous incubator and it took a lot of focused time to go through all of them so the compensation is fair. GMC members should not be restricted from participating.

RP Explorer

I think it makes sense to have an open source alternative to Rocketscan.

If the GMC funds this it should be fully open source. It makes zero sense for the backend to be closed source. The security argument is nonsensical.

They should also provide links to their previous work.

In comparison, Rocketscan took 2y to build (single dev, part time in evenings, weekends, xmas holidays). It was awarded 1382 RPL (+ 500 RPL if open sourced) which was ~$50k at the time and now worth $14k.

RocketFi

The application is sus. The guy also had a weird grant application in Round 9.

But the idea itself is not bad. There’s already a mockup which visually looks fine.

If this gets funded he should not get paid separately for the research and frontend mockup milestone because these things are useless to the community without the rest.

rETH Integration in wannabet

It’s posted in the wrong thread, it’s a retro not a grant.

rETH is permissionless to integrate and it’s a standard ERC20 token so there’s not that much effort to integrate it compared to other tokens like wETH/USDC.

I think it makes sense to fund some rETH integrations.

But this one is a tiny one, not sure how much it will impact rETH adoption. I’d fund it but pay a token amount like $100. I also couldn’t help but notice they want LUSD not RPL.

Tokenomics Rework Prelude

Pay them. Include Epineph.

Retros

rETH Slippage for IMC

Pay him. But I am biased because I’m also on the IMC.

Node Operator Behavior Trends

Pay him. We should reward research like this.

Historical Staking Snapshots

Pay him. It’s nice to have and the amount requested seems fair.

1 Like
3

Thanks for the review!

Although it doesn’t quite feel like a full accomplishment yet, lol (I’m not weird :sweat_smile:—just didn’t know the application progress last time). I’m totally fine with the research and frontend work being bulked up, although these steps are usually key milestones.

That said, could you let me know what the next steps are for this application?

Thanks mate

4

Hey Peteris, thanks for the reviews.

Regarding ours, you raised two important issues and we would like to address them:

  • Open Source Backend: We understand your preference for an open-source backend. While our initial suggestion was to keep it closed source, we’re definitely open to releasing the backend code if it better aligns with GMC’s interests.

  • Links to Previous Work: We’ve both been working in the web3 for over 5 years now, in collaboration and in separate projects with others. But we prefer to keep the specifics of our previous projects private for confidentiality reasons. This is not a new issue for us, working in crypto. We’ve foreseen this and is the main reason why we’re asking for no payment upfront.

Thanks again for your insights!