When was your DAO / Project established? At the NearCon 2022 Hackathon
DAO’s Category: Ecosystem
Project’s Category: Community Led
Section 2. Previous Funding
Have you received funding for this project from any source? Yes, USDC 1,400 from NDC for running a community challenge to design various badges and other artwork.
Section 7. DAO/Project Charter/White or Litepaper and Goals
Project Overview: IAH is about providing the ecosystem DAOs / projects / protocols / dApps / widgets with access to proof-of-personhood information. They can use this information to ensure that their project members are all real humans, and that each human is only represented once. IAH also gives projects access to create “Community SBTs” intended as secondary verification points.
This proposal only covers the immediate and real costs of “keeping the lights on”, which includes paying for the various services that underpin IAH, such as the Google Cloud oracle, Netlify, Gitbook, the domain name, SBT minting fees, etc.
[Note: While the project also might have future ambitions to grow, for example by adding KYC, reputation, and other verification points, such plans are NOT covered by this proposal.]
Section 8. Budget
Projected Budget:
Fixed costs: IAH upkeep cost at minumum $230 per month. More during months of heavy activity, such as during the signup for voting.
Variable costs: <$1 per each new FV. We are currently at pretty low volumes, but this could change at any time.
Due to the relatively low costs, the unpredictable nature of the costs, and wanting to avoid excessive admin, we are asking for $3,000 to hopefully cover 2024. The money will go into the IAH DAO and from there be used to pay our SaaS bills.
Will your team be fully renumerated from this budget? No, this does not include any remuneration for the team.
This project would fit into any of the below budget categories
Main Category
Subcategory code
Subcategory description
NDC Congress tools
HOM-002B
Tools for Congress
Public Goods
HOM-003P-2-1
KYC Solution for Payments and NDC
NDC Operations
HOM-003P-3-1
Streamline NDC Operations
Widening Adoption of NEAR
HOM-004P-1-1-1
Ecosystem
Section 9. Project/DAO longevity
Does your project/DAO require one-time or continuous funding? This project requires continuous funding to keep the lights on. (We might also ask for separate funding to keep developing the IAH toolset, but that would be a separate request.)
Will your DAO/Project device way of sustaining itself after this round of funding? Not in the current plan, not if we can avoid it. IAH started as a public good providing proof-of-personhood for free, and we would like to see it continue this way.
What are the possible roadblocks to the success of your project/DAO? Non-availability of funding.
Dear @robert ! As a point of contact, I am sharing with you the consolidated feedback:
The Operations Team should determine if the tool will be used for future elections and, if so, process the request through the Ops budget. There is concern about the unclear benefit for the ecosystem and a request for clarification on why support for this tool is necessary.
You can find comments from each HoM member in this section.
Thanks @Dacha . Unfortunately, the UPS team made it clear already (in few places) that they won’t need solution like IAH / prrsonhood check.
That’s why we created this proposal. It should be seen as an independent proposal, to support evolution of proof of prrsonhood and going towards new social reputation.
Hm. We put forward the proposal as community members, we haven’t changed our mind. The proposal still stands, and we would absolutely love for you to approve it. But the proverbial ball is clearly in HoM’s court.
Some friendly advice though: If I was in the house I wouldn’t launch any proposals that I didn’t already know I had 8 member support for. But if I believed in something strongly enough then I would for sure whip up support for it first, and then launch it. Unless of course I was trying to make a point that the house is dysfunctional and unable to take even the simplest decision…
The community doesn’t need to see a ton of proposals getting rejected due to lack of votes. It’s just sad. Better to just bundle up all the gov forum proposals you’re gonna reject into one Astra++ vote that you get 8 people to vote in favor of. That way we would at least know that this is what you want, and who thinks what.
Also: it’s within your prerogative to work with the community and alter proposals. To improve on them. You know, to actually govern. We are her to talk to you. We could change the proposal on our end if you have suggestions. Or you could make additions on your end before launching on Astra.
If the community wanted a simple mechanism to only vote and revote on any static proposals then we would have designed Gitcoin or Snapshot instead of three houses with elected representatives. You’re getting paid to actually govern, not to just shuffle proposals.
Since there seem to be debate on the value of IAH, allow me to list a few benefits to the whole ecosystem.
IAH is like the old “Twitter Blue” checkmark. You can have many accounts, but only one that’s verified.
IAH is like the national identifier in many countries which allow you to vote and receive benefits. But it’s a decentralized, permissionless and global version of it.
IAH enables fantastic things like:
Human gated DAOs
Human gated Games
Human gated Learn-to-Earn protocols
Human gated UBI
Human gated Airdrops
Human gated Launch Pads / Fairlaunches
Human gated Polls
Human gated NDC Votes
Human gated Social protocols
Human gated Community SBTs
Quadratic voting
Quadratic funding (like PotLock)
We built IAH as a public good for all of the community to enjoy, and as public free infrastructure accessible to all devs. There is no fee to mint your IAH SBTs. We in IAH DAO absorb all the costs. The only funding to date has been through GWG and NDC.
If HoM decides to shut down funding then the community at least deserves a clear reason and a better alternative.
But IAH is also not perfect, and we would really like to improve on it. Particularly we would like to add non-biometric options to get verified, and some version of FastAuth to simplify Onboarding to Near. I’m gonna launch a separate proposal about this in the Near future. Please ping me and/or Robert individually if you have ideas on how to make this successful.
Hi guys. So if I understood correctly there are two parts of obtaining SBT token on example of Face Verification SBT. It is firstly issued by IAH through Fractal and then anybody can mint it on-chain and decentralize minting process if necessary. So minting can be decentralized but overall issuance process depends on Fractal and IAH database. I have several questions in this context
Can we issue SBT tokens having IAH private servers down, only using smart-contracts?
You’re correct that Fractal does the first step, verifying the face scan. The second step, minting the SBT is done by you on the IaH platform and the accuracy against fractal is verified by the IaH oracle. You cannot mint the FV SBT on other platforms.
Community SBTs on the other hand can be minted by any issuer.
Blacklisting is not done by IAH. It is done as part of the Congress voting contracts.
