Sep 1-9 2023 Grants/Bounties/Retrospective Awards Round Results

Hello everyone! We have concluded discussions and scoring for the Sep 1-9 2023 Grants/Bounties/RA Award Round. This marks the first award cycle under RPIP-26 that uses the monthly format. It is also the first award cycle where subcommittees were introduced. I’m happy to announce the following award winners. For those who did not receive an award, please note that applicants are welcome to re-apply.

This post also begins the fourteen-day clock during which, according to RPIP-15, “[a]nyone MAY file an RPIP disputing a grant, bounty, or retrospective award within two weeks of the announcement of recipients. Such an RPIP SHALL be subject to a snapshot vote.” Any awards not subject to such a challenge will become official on Oct 8 at 23:59 UTC.

Differences From Last Round
  • Monthly Cycle
  • Negotiation Phase
  • Subcommittees
  • Feedback Commentary

The new subcommittees system added a slew of efficiencies to the GMC process. Internal discussions were more extensive and detailed this time. The GMC had external discussions (negotiations), which lead to better communication and hopefully result in improved final products.

This is the breakdown of subcommittees for this round:

jcrtp, object Object, 0xFornax

anisoptera.eth, Ken, mentor

rplmaxi.eth, dondo, Waq

During the voting process, the committee members had the opportunity to overturn awards from other subcommittees if they did not agree with the decision.

Negotiation Phase

Committee members had opportunities to discuss applications with both the applicants, and / or other experts in the Rocket Pool community. Discussions ranged from simple to detailed conversations. The marketing subcommittee suggested a number of revisions leading to detailed milestones and stronger applications overall.

Feedback Commentary

After a few iterations, it became clear that the public feedback forms were highly inefficient. They have been replaced with a commentary prepared by the administrator and reviewed by the GMC before the final vote. This process, incorporating input from updated internal sheets and negotiations, has greatly improved the quality of commentary for each decision.

Proposal Scoring Process

Awards were denominated in USD for the purposes of committee discussions and voting on finalized award amounts. Awards were then converted to RPL at the current ratio ($21/RPL) as of shortly before this posting (and then rounded up to the nearest RPL).

Awards, Average Overall Scores
Number Committee Proposer Title Decision Amount (RPL - RPL at $21/RPL) Amount (USD) Average score
GA042301 Research GeorgiaOpenUX OpenUX Node Operator And Community Research Study Approved at revised amount 1586 $33,300 13.00
GA042303 Marketing SheNodes RocketPool Internship Approved at revised amount 71 $1,500 9.00
GA042305 Marketing arbora Rocket School Approved at revised amount 476 $9,999 11.33
GA042306 Dev NonFungibleYokem RocketMevMonitor Approved 414 $8,700 13.50
GA042307 Dev dendrETH Trustless Oracle Approved 2381 $50,000 11.50
RA042301 All ShfRyn GMC Administrator Approved 744 $15,625 12.83
RA042302 All calurduran GMC Start-Up and Initial Round Work Approved at revised amount 533 $11,200 15.00
RA042303 Research calurduran Leading oDao and pDao Charter Writing Approved at revised amount 1586 $33,300 11.00
RA042304 Research Uisce DAO Outreach Nexus Mutual Approved 424 $8,900 12.00
RA042305 Marketing KentPhilly StakeRocketPool Videos Approved at revised amount 71 $1,500 10.67
RA042306 Marketing KentPhilly RPL Market DeFi Rates Approved 12 $250 14.67
GA042304 Dev IPOR Labs rETH Stake Rate Index and rETH Stake Rate Swaps Deferral - see comments - 3.00
GA042302 Marketing Durry Motion Design Asset Development Declined - see comments - 7.67
Award Commentary
  • GA042301 - OpenUX Node Operator And Community Research Study
    The GMC and the applicant have collaboratively negotiated the project with a revised budget of $33,300. This budget adjustment aims to facilitate the GMC’s assessment of whether the research outcomes can be effectively leveraged to enhance the protocol. Furthermore, the GMC has expressed a keen interest in doubling the number of node operators within a six-month timeframe. To achieve this goal, they have closely collaborated with the applicant to develop a project designed to enhance various metrics, including node operator growth. If the project is successful, the GMC has expressed a strong inclination towards providing additional funding for future research projects initiated by the applicant.

  • GA042303 - RocketPool Internship
    Following deliberations with the applicant, the GMC has made the decision to support the video segment of her request. The GMC have committed to disbursing $750 for the five videos that have already been produced, with an additional $750 to be provided upon the successful completion of future videos. The subject matter of these videos will center around her proposed “Beginner Rocket Pool Node Operator Series.” The GMC will actively collaborate with her in shaping the content roadmap for this series. Furthermore, the GMC has advised the applicant to submit separate applications for the apparel and website components of her proposal once those concepts have been further developed.

  • GA042305 - Rocket School
    The GMC has reached an agreement with the applicant where they have established clear monthly milestones for three months, each rewarded with USD $3333 upon successful completion. The total funding will be $9999. These funds are specifically allocated for website updates, video scripting and production, and course development.

  • GA042306 - RocketMev Monitor
    The GMC has chosen to fully support this initiative because it appears to be a valuable tool for effectively monitoring the “challenging” aspects of MEV theft, especially if it’s made accessible for anyone to utilize. This solution addresses a significant challenge in the uncertainty of the long-term availability of relayer data. Joe can envision myself integrating this tool into my regular reporting to the team, providing insights into the evolving landscape. The GMC has decided to fund the stretch goal as well, as it aligns with the type of resource we can reference in our research endeavors to better understand MEV trends.

  • GA042307 - Trustless Oracle
    Following discussions with the applicant and a representative from NodeSet, the GMC has reached a unanimous decision to provide complete funding for this application. The revised proposal is more aligned with the GMC’s values. The GMC has chosen to adhere to the payment milestones detailed within the project timeline, as outlined here: DendrETH: A trustless oracle for liquid staking protocols - HackMD

  • RA042301 - GMC Administrator
    The GMC acknowledges ShfRyn’s commendable work during his interim role as GMC admin, and we have decided to provide retroactive compensation for his contributions, aligning with expectations set earlier. This payment reflects the recognition of his dedicated service and the valuable work he performed for the protocol’s benefit.

  • RA042302 - GMC Start-up Work
    Calurduran played a crucial role in establishing the GMC’s framework, initially without expecting payment. Cal’s foundational work in creating a process flow greatly benefited the GMC, and the GMC supports this retrospective award with a revised increased payment.

  • RA042303 - Leading oDao and pDao Charter Writing
    The GMC acknowledges the substantial effort put into fostering consensus among the Rocket Pool community and advancing the proposed charters. We extend our gratitude to Valdorff for their valuable contributions. The GMC did not believe they sufficient data to grant full funding, however, the GMC is keen on exploring the establishment of a policy to recognize and reward RPIP or governance-related endeavors in the future.

  • RA042304 - DAO Outreach Nexus Mutual
    The application was thoroughly justified and well-reasoned, providing a strong foundation for the requested amount. The GMC is contemplating establishing a standing “finders fee” for rETH onboarding as a potential consideration moving forward.

  • RA042305 - StakeRocketPool Videos
    Kent has displayed commendable commitment and effort in creating value for our community. Unfortunately, his videos currently face challenges in terms of engagement and reach, leading to limited ROI. In response, the GMC is partnering with the applicant to develop a dedicated DeFi hub or resource within the community for Kent, where they leverage his videos and

  • RA042306 - RPL Market DeFi Rates
    Kent has done an excellent job sprucing up this tool. We suggest he make the most of it in conjunction with his DeFi videos, as outlined in RA042305.

  • GA042304 – rETH Stake Rate Index and rETH Stake Rate Swaps
    The GMC is still actively discussing with members from the IMC the value in this project.

  • GA042302 – Motion Design Asset Development
    The GMC is declining the motion design development grant due to concerns about the availability of a more cost-effective option in Sleety, and uncertainty about the assets’ utilization.

Final Vote

The final vote was 3 in favor of all (jcrtp, Fornax, Ken), 4 wishing to see RA042303 awarded at 100% (Waq, rplmaxi, anisoptera, dondo), and 1 opposed (object Object). mentor.eth did not vote on the final slate of awards, but he was a part of the video discussions and the scoring.


Hi all, I want to discuss RA042303 - Leading oDao and pDao Charter Writing. I will start by explicitly stating that while I believe the amount requested was reasonable, I will not be pushing for further funds on this (though I would not stand in the way if others opted to). I’d like to focus on process here, not payment.


The GMC did not believe they sufficient data to grant full funding, however, the GMC is keen on exploring the establishment of a policy to recognize and reward RPIP or governance-related endeavors in the future.

The GMC at no point reached out to me about RA042303 in any way. They did not ask for more data for this specific case, or wish to discuss governance-related rewards in general.

I understand the negotiation phase is primarily for bounties/grants, which are able to be modified or opted out of, but if the GMC are going with a much different value than proposed I think it would be sensible to reach out to talk during this phase (even assuming no changes in outcome).

What is being rewarded?

There is no feedback. The closest thing is “the substantial effort put into fostering consensus”. Neither of the frameworks used by Calurduran in the proposal were mentioned - were they used? Was another framework used?

This is not idle curiosity. This is actionable by me and any other folks that wish to lead efforts.

  • Eg, for first framework: if the GMC believes 5-10% is too high, that’s something future work can consider when looking to save the DAO money. If the GMC thinks 5-10% is reasonable but that it would’ve resulted in a shorter delay, then that’s different. Finally, did the GMC focus “strictly on the revenue benefit”? These factors are actionable for future actors in choosing how to act. It’s important to keep in mind that the whole point of the GMC is to cause people to act in ways beneficial to the DAO, so communication here is paramount.
  • Eg, for the second framework: if the GMC believes (per the second framework) that we would’ve paid a grant in the $50k range for this work, but that we should only fund a retrospective to $33k… well… I’d want to know that. Again we need to communicate clearly so future folks act in ways we want.
  • Eg, finally, in terms of what was said, the best one could do is sound effortful. Frankly, I hope that was not the primary metric. I hope that what was considered was, in some way, (A) value to the DAO and (B) cost for the next-best “replacement”.


During the voting process, the committee members had the opportunity to overturn awards from other subcommittees if they did not agree with the decision.

I have a few concerns about process clarity, the non-vote (note this is different from an abstain), and the portion of process that couples voting on the overall slate to voting on overturns. I’ve brought these up with the GMC admin (since they’re primarily driving process) and they’ll discuss internally.


Hello everyone!

We saw that you are still discussing our application GA042304. Is it already foreseeable when a decision can be expected? If you have any questions, we are happy to help at any time.

Kind regards

1 Like

Hi Slevin,

The GMC should have a decision for you on or around October 27th. It should be in a post similar to this.


Hey ShfRyn,

in case it might be helpful for your decision-making: We are expected to launch stake rate swaps for stETH by the end of the year. Then you can see for yourself how it works.

1 Like