Content
@
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
martin ↑
@martin
pre-candidate idea for propdates 2.0, with @six shout out to @wilsoncusack @seneca for the incentives idea thoughts ?
7 replies
0 recast
9 reactions
seneca
@seneca
3 mos makes more sense to me. 2 feels short, 4 feels long for how early the experiment is. aside from seeing the ind time commitment on the prop, roles would be nice too. assuming you're FE/founder role.. i'm curious what onion would be taking on. ^ an exercise in good prop structure / setting precedent
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
krel
@krel
would you consider streaming the funds? i want to explore setting precedent for streaming so we can be more comfortable making bets where there is execution risk example: you find out after 2 months that this is not pulling your interest anymore so we cancel the stream
3 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
rafa
@rafa
It seems like your goal is increase adoption or usage right? Have propdate users :: and especially those not using it :: provided any feedback on what would be best for the roadmap? For example, is markdown really a concern? Or does it have to do with gas fees?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
leoclark.⌐◨-◨ ᖽ🎩
@leoclark.eth
Hey Martin, any thoughts on adding the builder (receiver of funds) to be able to update the proposals? Cheers
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Noun 40
@noun40
supportive! what’s the planned time commitment from you both?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
rafa
@rafa
@rafi this is a good basic proposal template
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ben
@jarmen
Thanks for working on a better update process. I’m tired of searching the forbidden forest 🌳
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
