retroactive grants are cool but they require builders take on all the risk (build it and you *might* get *some* funding)

an alternative ✨proactive✨ approach:

Head of Founder Community at Polygon, leopard tamer, esports expat, Boys Club maxi. Prev: Head of DevRel @ OP Labs, game studio founder

Love this though I think it’s important to think of these as AND rather than OR. Ideally we have a system with both proactive and retroactive funding. 

This seems like an iteration on upfront grants and bounties in general, and I’m here for it iterating the heck out of those🙂

kind of? key differences are:

1) funding (risk) happens before not after
2) flow of funds entirely onchain (verifiable, predictable)
3) uncapped upside (contributors receive pro rata exposure to project success)

"shares in a company" is a legacy/web2 way of framing it: not incorrect, but not really correct either

co founder of @metamask . Making computers behave for us.

interesting. say more? that could be a cool alternate version of the contract to deploy 🤔

You could set up a sort of auction for your target price where once the time is up, if the target is hit, the cost is split evenly, so it minimizes the cost of access for contributors.

dc/tg (oscillations) anytime, happy to help!

I’d like to implement this into a coming venture

build, lift, & coffee | ENS Steward | namestone.xyz | slobo.xyz

because most people aren’t aware of better alternatives yet

for bad actors with no reputation, yes. for credible builders with real reputational risk, no

Does it flip the incentives?

With retroactive goal is to build actual product with usage - that’s the only way you get rewarded

With proactive you get paid regardless the usage - you can be better off getting new grants for new projects vs building

cypherpunk • human rights lawyer • actress • queen  // hosting /aaina • also indivisible.fm 

on desktop then cropped and rounded the corners in figma because i like to get fancy like that

The only problem is externality pricing.

Building https://negationgame.com

the only difference between this and what i’ve proposed is the form of the retroactive funding: an uncertain charity handout from a “dao” vs rev share from customers. i’ll take the later thx

the way to solve this is with investment in builders where the investor gets a fraction of the retrofunding

hmm good question. the same as it does in web2/legacy fundraising, whereby contributors provide financial support directly to the project? would have the added benefit of an onchain record (erc20 contribution tokens https://blog.withfabric.xyz/contribution-tokens) that you could potentially do interesting things with

Building: web3 infrastructure for impact @C4CollabEcon

Cool idea! How could this work for nonprofit/impact-based projects? 

Also, I would be wary of token-gating participation as I think the act of issuing a token might be self-limiting in the upcoming climate of regulation. Perhaps other mechanisms with similar outcomes could be found (soulbound NFTs for funders etc)

/ted | exploring the onchain frontier | surfing @ venice, ca | eating @ gjusta / gjelina

Founder @withBackdrop, enabling more digital painters, gardeners, and explorers

does something have to be free in order to be considered a public good? if so, then no, i don’t think this approach is a good match for that use case. more for helping to distribute startup risk (and reward) between creator and consumer

Do you see this as a viable model for public goods given that you have to charge people for usage? Aren’t those the kinds of projects that get most of the retroactive grants?

lore @optimism | ex: @coinbase | views are my own | what if it all worked out? 

💯 streaming grants retroactively based on previously agreed upon and executed milestones is a huge improvement. agreed it doesn't really address upfront costs. an interesting experiment: crowdfund upfront costs then share a portion of future streams with contributors

Interesting 

what about streamed retroactive grants? It seems like one of the things is upfront costs that are difficult, but with streamed retro grants based on agreed upon milestones being hit can perhaps unlock some of those burdens?

Founder /kiwi-news, a decentralized Hacker News

sorry where’s the mistake? what i’m proposing gives you the same amount of money per hour worked *and* ownership

if you voluntarily work for a lower hourly rate then that’s on you

I think there is a mistake in your thinking. I make vastly more money hourly than with Kiwi News and so my risk-free rate is incredibly high. But consider, in 99% or my freelance work, I do not retain ownership in my work, so I cannot gain from it after the fact. You have to factor this in.

Is everyone on this am a super intelligent big brained chad.

I feel like a kid at a candy store😂😂

I feel my curiosity coming alive here.

This is absolutely brilliant!

Mad respect. I rarely see this problem discussed at all, let alone addressed proactively. 

Thanks for the nerdsnipe. Now I'm gonna be thinking about this model all weekend. 💜

Would be interested in playing a product marketing role for any builders wanting to try this out.

I love this model and can’t wait to do a round with you guys