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!

5

Bounties

None. :face_with_head_bandage:

Retros

:white_circle: rETH Slippage for IMC - continued maintenance

I wrote it, so obviously I support it. But going with the white circle cuz I did indeed write it.

:green_circle: Node Operator Behavior Trends

Useful outputs. To me, $4k vibes higher than direct value from this specific exercise, but as sckuzzle notes this is super subjective. On the other end of the scale, and perhaps more important to the ecosystem, it’s useful to show that we value/reward concrete analysis (assuming we want to get more of that in the future).

:green_circle: Historical Staking Snapshots

Useful resource. Low-enough price imo.

:green_circle::red_circle: rETH Integration in wannabet

Insofar as “we used rETH” goes, I don’t think we need to pay for that. rETH is awesome, and that’s why folks should use it. I’m ok with a small thank-you for that; using the ethos-aligned LST is cool.

I’d be a little more amenable to a high price point if rETH was pushed a little. Eg, list it ahead of rETH, and if someone selects WETH toss up a “estimated payout using rETH is x more” or perhaps a total to make for a big number like “wannabet users could have made x more ETH if they used rETH instead of WETH”.

So my suggestion might something structured like:

  • Pay a lil $100-$500 ty
  • Payout based on usage in the next year; eg the lower of $1.5k and 0.5% of average rETH held in the contract for the year

Grants

:green_circle::white_circle: rETH Growth Incubator Review

Reasonable amounts and I support the program generally. I do think we might be going a bit early on this effort (though I might be wrong, and early is decidedly better than late, so I get it).

:green_circle: :yellow_circle: RP Explorer

I agree with peteris that it’s important to have the whole thing be open sourced. The submitter does not have a reputation to fall back on to engender trust, so the ability of the community to (a) have some visibility and (b) fork to have a backup.

The price does seem steep as well, though not completely outlandish. It helps a lot that the payment can all be based on outcomes.

In short, I don’t support it as is, but hope that folks can talk and find a way to make it work well.

:yellow_circle: RocketFi

Some reference points:

This looks like an in-betweener. The contents are a bit more like defillama, though significantly less inclusive. It is very nice that it directly links to pages where you can act. It also is a little like rpldefi in trying to describe strategies a bit, especially risk and reward.

My main question ends up being along the lines of: how would we get ppl to this page? Whether it’s worth it or not probably hinges on that question. Defillama is a general resource ppl are aware of. rpldefi gets community amplification. This seems like it would need the latter to be successful. Not sure how I feel about the price given that I think the key to success is not truly the product itself (ie, an adequate product with high visibility is likely to outperform a stellar product with modest visibility) – it’s not super expensive, but yeah… all about the usage.

(as a side note, and this applies to all three of the things I’ve talked about, clicking links to put money into is dangerous if ppl don’t know to check contract addresses and, ideally, simulate transactions.)

Quibble: Operation cost needs to define a timeframe

:white_circle: RPIP-62: Tokenomics Rework Prelude

I’m too involved on this one and won’t opine.

6

Thanks for the review @Valdorff

I would like to clarify a few points mentioned:

  • Use Cases: RocketFi not only showcases liquidity market data but also includes lend/borrow market data, which is crucial for both rETH holders and node operators. Other references lack this part.

  • Data Retrieval: Data will be indexed via The Graph and updated multiple times daily, reducing manual effort and improving user experience.

  • Beyond Data Display: Strategies and educational content will be continuously updated, such as loop lending for maximizing APR and borrowing market arbitrage.

  • Security Awareness: I’ll enhance security warnings.

Regarding promotion and user reach, this falls under operation, which is ongoing. Although no specific timeframe was given, a one-year period can be defined. This includes:

  • Daily data maintenance, adding new opportunities and retrieving corresponding data.

  • Exposure Enhancement: Initially reaching Rocketpool’s existing community, posts in Discord when new incentives arise. Additionally, suggesting the inclusion of hyperlinks on the official website for users to explore.

  • Attracting New Users: Promoting in DeFi protocol communities, such as Silo, when rETH has new OP incentives, drawing new rETH holders, and offering them other protocol opportunities through RocketFi, this approach helps solidify strategies, as engagement in these protocols creates more synergy between new rETH holders and the available DeFi options.

  • Twitter and SEO Optimization: Improving natural search traffic through optimization.

7

The defillama link I provided absolutely has lending markets including TVL, APY, and chain (the things in your example). Can filter on it like so https://defillama.com/yields?token=RETH&category=Lending. rpldefi.com has a Lending/Leverage section with snapshotted versions of that info and additional info (much less consistently presented and much more in depth in some cases, eg oracle info and supply cap info).

  • The frequency of data retrieval is a big advantage over RPLdefi.com, and similar to defillama
  • The security awareness thing wasn’t specifically aimed at your site – it’s a tough problem generally
  • Thanks for filling in some more info on operation
1 Like
8

Thank you for pointing that out.

I noticed there is lending data included, but it seems somewhat limited. For example, newer platforms like Contango aren’t listed, and Silo seems to be missing as well. I will make sure to index these into RocketFi. Additionally, submitting a PR to DeFiLlama could be a helpful way to improve and expand their listings.