Name of Bounty
RPIP Review
What is the nature of the proposed bounty?
Contribute a reasonable impact towards the review or verification of a ratified RPIP.
Benefits - enter N/A where appropriate
| Group | Benefits |
|---|---|
| Potential rETH holders | N/A |
| rETH holders | N/A |
| Potential NOs | N/A |
| NOs | Facilitates progress in governance initiatives, enhances review efficiency, and prevents deadlocks. |
| Community | Facilitates progress in governance initiatives, enhances review efficiency, and prevents deadlocks. |
| RPL holders | Facilitates progress in governance initiatives, enhances review efficiency, and prevents deadlocks. |
What other non-RPL protocols, DAOs, projects, or individuals, would stand to benefit from the bounty being successfully completed?
None
Work and Verification
What steps would be entailed in completing the bounty?
The RPIP was successfully ratified and the GMC deemed the contributed work had successfully removed any significant bottlenecks in the RPIP ratification process.
Do successful examples of such work exist elsewhere?
a35u identified an error in RPIP-4’s voting text. RPIP-26 had an error that was missed by pretty much all of governance and was not discovered until 10 days into the vote.
How long is the proposed bounty available for?
The bounty will be available for 3 months or until the initial pool of funds is exhausted. The GMC will review its effectiveness after this period.
Is it awarded to the first team to successfully claim it, or is it in some way divided among all such successful claims in the proposed availability period?
The award is split between the contributing parties based on relative contributions from start to finish of the process.
Who will test any products submitted for claiming the bounty?
The GMC will test and verify the submissions for claiming the bounty. They will cross reference the information provided with all parties involved.
What is the acceptance criteria for awarding of the bounty?
Acceptance requires that any new process verification steps are submitted through a pull request. If these steps are absent from the checklist, they should be merged into it.
Payment
How much USD $ is the applicant requesting for successful completion of the bounty?
I suggest approving $5k for this bounty; it’s perfectly fine to have leftover funds when the bounty period of 3 months runs out.
Here are some tiers I propose:
- Small - $50
- Medium - $250
- Large - $500
The compensation will be determined considering the time saved, the importance of the RPIP, and the severity of the issue:
- High Severity: This issue would invalidate a vote or necessitate immediate rework, such as cases where the vote text is actively misleading, as observed in the a35u incident.
- Medium Severity: This issue requires clarification during an ongoing vote or necessitates rework in the near future. For example, the quorum requirement in RPIP-4 led to a revote for the sake of simplicity.
- Low Severity: This issue can be rectified by RPIP editors after the vote, encompassing general aspects like spelling, grammar, formatting, and similar concerns.
The impact of individuals’ contributions will consider effort, time saved, and severity (eg, “without this contribution, the vote would’ve been invalid”).
Conflict 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 the GMC Administrator and developed this bounty based on a request from the GMC. The content of this bounty was composed after discussions with LongForWisdom and Valdorff.
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?
No financial benefits will be received by the applicant or any related protocol or project, aside from Rocket Pool, upon successful completion of the bounty.