Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
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:
26 replies
16 recasts
61 reactions
Connor McCormick ☀️
@nor
the way to solve this is with investment in builders where the investor gets a fraction of the retrofunding
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
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
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Connor McCormick ☀️
@nor
ahhh, I didn't read the screenshot I just read the cast text. Yeah, I think what that's useful. But I don't think it's really retrofunding it's more like traditional investment, right? What if a project is beneficial but can't be gated? E.g. someone makes great memes which draw quality users to farcaster?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
yep, more like a collaborative investment in that contributors can share in the upside on a pro rata basis (via erc20 contribution tokens https://blog.withfabric.xyz/contribution-tokens). gating might not be useful/desirable/applicable in all cases
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction