Proposal: a support program for small Dapps developers and other projects

There is another idea that I would like to share with the community. This is about putting together a fund and a small review board to support smaller Dapps developers.
I am aware that the NGL Ignite program exists, an endeavor that I applaud. However, I think that there may be smaller projects or ideas out there that are not necessarily suitable for such a program.

Structure:

The board should be chosen from the community, it should be classically structured. 2-3 technically experienced members, 2 ethic commissioned (optional) 1 treasurer.

The fund consists of donations from us (the community), we are talking about a manageable sum. I think we should try to gather a budget of 5000 - 20.000 usd in crypto.

Projects that pass the board will then be elected by the community as before.

Why:

Additional creation of an incentive for developers.

Restore interactivity, decision making and control, within our community. (there is not much of that at the moment)

Potential benefits of creating additional applications or usage models for the ecosystem.

Summary:

Yes it is similar to the former Foundation Model, we all know that community involvement does not always promise success. Personally I think that parts of this community have grown up in the last years. Furthermore, the designated committee and the limited budget should minimize possible damage or mismanagement.
It is easily possible that we will have to create some kind of additional structure for this, which will certainly not be easy but may be unavoidable from a fiscal point of view.
Overall, I am personally convinced that we could benefit from such a program.
As always, this is meant as a suggestion and a starting point for discussion.

もうひとつ、コミュニティと共有したいアイデアがあります。それは、小規模なDapps開発者を支援するための基金と小規模な審査会を設置することです。
NGL Igniteプログラムの存在は知っていますし、その試みは賞賛に値します。しかし、そのようなプログラムには必ずしも適さない小規模なプロジェクトやアイデアがあるのではないかと考えています。

構成について。

委員会はコミュニティから選ばれ、古典的な構成にすべきである。2-3人の技術的に経験豊富なメンバー、2人の倫理的な委員(任意)、1人の会計係。

基金は我々(コミュニティ)からの寄付で構成され、管理可能な金額について話し合っています。予算としては、5,000~20,000米ドルのクリプト(暗号)を集めようと考えています。

理事会を通過したプロジェクトは、以前のようにコミュニティによって選出されます。

なぜかというと

開発者へのインセンティブの追加創出。

コミュニティの中に、インタラクティブ性、意思決定、コントロールを取り戻す。(現在はあまりありませんが)

エコシステムに新たなアプリケーションや利用モデルが生まれる可能性があるからです。

まとめ。

確かに以前のFoundation Modelに似ていますが、コミュニティの参加が必ずしも成功を約束するものではないことは誰もが知っています。 個人的には、このコミュニティの一部はここ数年で成長したと思います。さらに、指定された委員会と限られた予算により、起こりうる損害や不始末を最小限に抑えることができます。
このために何か追加の組織を作らなければならない可能性もありますが、それは確かに簡単なことではありませんが、財政的な観点からは避けられないでしょう。
全体として、個人的にはこのようなプログラムが有益であると確信しています。
いつものように、これは提案であり、議論の出発点となるものです。

6 Likes

I can take part in financing that.

We should define clear rules about what candidate projects should make public (project specs) and what known only to the committee (ID of devs, curriculum vitae).

By “voting” you mean existing POI vote on NIS1 blockchain or some new system on Symbol?

3 Likes

In principle, a number of things need to be discussed regarding implementation and possible institutionalization. Should the idea meet with broad approval and come to implementation, many points must be precisely defined. Also these you mention.
I am sure we will find things that I have not yet considered, thank you for your support.

The voting system can run via Nanowallet. Whether POI is suitable I am not necessarily sure now. Maybe again by a whitelist to prevent manipulation, I do not know. Also this point can be discussed here with pleasure.

原則として、実施と制度化については多くのことを議論する必要があります。このアイデアが広く賛同され、実行に移される場合、多くの点を正確に定義する必要があります。あなたがおっしゃるようなことも。
私がまだ考えていないことも出てくると思いますので、よろしくお願いします。

投票システムはNanowalletで運用できます。POIが適しているかどうかは、今のところ必ずしもわかりません。操作を防ぐためにホワイトリストを設けるなどの方法があるかもしれませんが、私にはわかりません。また、この点については、ここで喜んで議論することができます。

I would also participate and support this initiative. Great idea @Stinghe_Dorian.

3 Likes

Hope I can help :+1:

2 Likes

Great initiative! :clap: I am also willed to donate some funding of 1000-3000$.

3 Likes

Thank you for the support and also thank you to the pledges to provide the budget. Equally important, however, should this venture come to fruition, is suitable volunteers for the said body. Unfortunately, I do not have sufficient technical know-how to evaluate potential projects.

I have heard that counter-proposals or opposing opinions to the said proposal have arisen. It would be appropriate to wait until they are posted here so that everyone can participate in the discussion.

Overall, I would be happy if we can discuss the matter further here, whether positive or negative.

1 Like

I would also support this.
However, I would suggest that the initial funding for this project comes from honeypots that are available.
I also think that ~15,000 usd is sufficient. This can be divided over a period of time. The rest should then be financed piece by piece through the community, but this is certainly not easy for a longer period.
The first thing to do is to create a voting module for Symbol. Since we now have two Chains and a part of the community is active on both, another part only on one Chain, it becomes difficult.
Only the community members should have the right to vote, who are also invested on the corresponding chain.
I think this gives a good chance to young people who are talented but do this on the side.
Of course this has to be available via github as opensource …

1 Like

Thanks also to Garm for his contribution, sorry for the late reply. I had the naive hope that over the weekend more contributions are added. I will create in the next few days a summary post that goes into the previous proposals. A short question I have to the honeypots: Do you mean the existing funds that are now as far as I can estimate, controlled by NGL?

For example, 50% could be financed through the community. If this sum is reached, the remaining 50% of the sum “X” could come from existing funds.
Actually we need much more such activities, which also act independently of the NGL (worldwide).
Here there should be start-up funding from existing funds. Since these projects are often smaller initiatives, support should not be a problem.
Without wanting to open a backward discussion here again, we have good examples through NIS1 where such possibilities were not exhausted.
If, for example, a small amount from the Silvercoinfound had been used for such initiatives, things might look different today.
Of course, the appropriate quality, should also be in the first place.

1 Like

This initiative would be important especially because the interests of the NGL and the community often do not have the same priority. Not to mention NEM-HUB. A good example that I always like to use is actually a CSV export for transactions and for harvesting under NIS1. This has something to do with usability.

Only @marc0o made the effort to provide such a tool back then.
A single developer in over 5 years.
We have the claim of an enterprise blockchain(symbol) and are not able to provide this CSV export to the community from the beginning, in a reasonable format ? This is exactly where such a community project could start. The NGL should provide a small amount of perhaps ~30000$, which is not controlled by the NGL, but exclusively by the community. You could make a list of what the community is missing, but of course especially follow up on free ideas.

With Bitcoin core, this was a given(CSV). At least since I started using this wallet … 2013.

1 Like

Brief summary after a week of creating the post.

Many thanks to the participants so far.

In principle, there is a willingness to implement it, but it is in contrast to the fundamental need to do it. At least I personally think so. I don’t see the financing or the budget as the problem here, but the body that has to be formed for this.
At the end of the day, it is not important where the money comes from, but that we fill the necessary positions that are needed for this undertaking. I can see @gevs for example being able to do a technical review of the projects but it shouldn’t be one person, we need at least 2 more volunteers.
If there are suitable candidates who can imagine this, it would be nice if you contact us here.
Only after we have overcome this hurdle we can start the selection process of the criteria for the projects and the applicants. Which are the points that @rigel as addressed.
Furthermore, @garm has mentioned a few important points, I agree with the initial sum of 15,000. However, in light of past history, I think we should perhaps do this without the involvement of the NGL. Maybe as a small “emancipation” of the community?
I am not sure what the legal framework of a Limited is in this case.
Potentially we could all profit from the thing, basically we all pursue the same goal.

Roadmap:

-Volunteers for the positions of the board.

-Foundation of an organization, because of taxes etc.

-Creation of a code that defines criteria for participation of interested developers.

-Create a multi-sig wallet with the budget.

-Elections with potential projects that have passed the review phase.

As always, this is open and should be interpreted as a suggestion. I look forward to hopefully lively participation. Please let me know what I have forgotten.

2 Likes

If you need community support, I’m happy to help. :grinning:

1 Like

Nem can use any help. But since it has become very quiet very quickly in this conversation, we will probably not get anywhere. Every now and then, however, that is enough to bring an approach or a topic forward again. Thank you for your offer.

1 Like

I would start here:

  1. Board of Directors - find members who are willing to volunteer to help

  2. Find the easiest way to finance

  3. Creation of the criteria, which prerequisites are necessary
    and which projects are shortlisted

  4. Github directory for corresponding projects

  5. Presentation of the projects here in the forum.

  6. voting

I think you can avoid the establishment of a foundation or something like that by giving the proposed projects their donation directly (aggregate transactions).

2 Likes