Currently, there’s a discussion about how to segment by genre (in the comments sections), and “gates” for funding is what’s presented as the rating system. “Segments” are “Genres” in this case, some suggest “interdisciplinary” as an example, which would need some clarity as well – do we mean only artistic discipline or do we also include technology collaboration? Just an example.
Though the proposal and reports sections make sense as an operations function, the “gates” or “tiers” are time-based on activity, and not based on growth or product trends.
So, if someone is only a year here, but is working on a creative endeavor that NEEDS the funding because it’s a space that is flourishing (e,g NFTs or DiFi) then that needs supportive data from the field to show why that’s a better model for success – OR if it simply easier to manage for the funding DAO – which is fine! It’s just not clear.
My reading is that the gates/tiers have a a ‘time’ aspect but only in order to limit eligibility, am I reading this wrong? They will still have to be voted on case by case. in other words, it’s to try to force DAOs to go trhough a learning process.
Right, and I am saying that the eligibility needs to have supportive data from the field to make sure this is the best way to do it. Time on-chain might be perfect, but why?
(in some cases, innovation happens quickly and is not time-based – unless the insight is that ALL DAOS really need this much time, then the info should be provided so NF can learn/understand).
ah, I see what you mean.
Time is being equated with ‘need’ or ‘value’; there might be newer projects in which the money would be better spent.
Maybe @Paul can expand a bit if there is a practical reason, maybe allowing the mods to spend time with ‘project x’ team and helping them go up the tiers, or if it was just a way of limiting work, or if there any other variables that might be better than ‘time’.
imho, tiers should be above all else be a reflection of a ‘web2-to-web3’ scale, i.e. projects should be supported with more money if they are providing ‘more’ on the web3 front, and projects who are still using web3 marginally (for example just astrodao) should stay in the lower tiers.
So, if the focus is on Web-3 (and funding is giving more weight to that) then what are the project successes, and learnings from the field using Web3 (from the creatives sectors) NOW that can inform that decision?
Everything needs to be based on real work, not a theory at this point.
A time-based criteria has also has some reasoning behind it, if we take into consideration there are funding sources below this vertical (below as in quantity of $), for example daocubator.org, and above it (for example NF Grants), so this Vertical can have as a cornerstone the interaction of DAOs with itself.
There is still possible funds for any kind of project, so innovation would not be stifled, and some sort of community-engagement would be potentiated, but agree that if a time-based gate exists it must be used with caution and maybe we should think of better ones or at least put it to the test.
What we are doing here, has never been done before (if so, then pardon my ignorance )
The supportive data is challenging to possess and also, and I believe it’s very expensive. This is bigger than Community Mods, (and everyone here) at this stage.
From the other perspective, a lot of projects in web3 are experiments, like Creatives (and others on NEAR).
Tiers based on time are not strict (this is only a suggestion, feel free to leave yours), also if a DAO falls under the highest Tier, that doesn’t mean that its proposal will be approved right away. What’s more important here is how we’ll evaluate a DAO.
Hello, Community.
I would like to start by commending @Paul and the @creativesdao-council for the great work put out so far and of course with this post presented above.
I would like to give my feedback and how I feel is the best approach to these problems highlighted above by Paul:
I would like to add four additional problems I believe the creatives community has to look into as well along with the presented issues above.
(Sequel) Current problems of Creatives DAO:
Poor digital presence and management of DAO
cause: Inadequate broader envisioning for Creatives DAO as the DAO of DAOs
No cross-vertical relationships between the available verticals.
cause: Little to No communication or relationship between representatives of Creatives DAO to other existing verticals. (There is no impossibility until proven otherwise)
Low workforce
cause: No provision to hire professionals and place in positions to do more work.
Absence of adequate Multiple nationalities/ethnicities in decision-making discussions.
cause: Broader envisioning and poor communication.
Here are My preferred solutions to the problems stated:
Change of usual monthly funding scheme to a Bi-Monthly (every two months) funding scheme which will promote:
Sufficient timely review of project proposals presented by the community.
Proper time spacing durations for proposed projects.
Simpler, more effective, and efficient workflow for project managers with the delivery of proposed projects.
(Solution- 1, 2 & 7)
The invention of a database systematic flow design that will aid the Creatives DAO to best track approved projects for funding, updated real-time progress and delays on each project as well as, extra costs incurred. This can be best done through the development and design of a “website” for the Creatives DAO with a portal that, will have a registration platform for councils and mods alike of various existing DAOs currently under the arm of the Creatives DAO vertical receiving funding. Uses:
Proper documentation/presentation of the happenings in the Creatives DAO.
Stronger marketing, as well as 50% increased visibility to a larger creative audience around the world.
A more appealing representation of the DAOs currently building amazing things through the funding from the Creatives vertical.
A launch pad for the Creatives DAO dedicated marketplace.
Better profiling of all the amazing DAOs and representatives under the Creatives DAO promoting transparency and better organization.
Provision of more jobs for people in the ecosystem and the assembly of a team of professionals to take up marketing roles for the DAO.
Increased communication and easier workflow between DAOs under the Creatives DAO arm.
Proper profiling of the Creatives DAO as a DAO of DAO’s mission, vision, funding scheme, past achievements, and, soon coming achievements. (Solution- 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, & 10)
Monthly discussions or conference meetings between Mods or the various verticals to discuss their challenges, possible solutions as well as best means or ways we could all help each vertical and how to best tackle and develop newer solutions that would help boost the community as a whole forward. There is no impossibility until proven otherwise and I believe we could have cross-vertical collaborations which will provide:
A smoother review approach to presented projects/proposals from community members creating more flexibility when approving creative projects with marketing/educational sections. (Solution- 9)
I can’t emphasize this enough, our approaches to problems differ due to one constant thing, and that is the various ethnicities and communities we come from and reach out to daily. Knowing this makes it reasonable to have at least one nationality from various countries with various backgrounds and beliefs amongst key positions like moderators or in some new division invented.
This will promote:
Fairness in critical decision making
Credibility with members of the community
Better understanding of things between Mods and members of the community.
Tier System:
I agree we should have a tier system but the funding would be of more reasonable usage in this manner:
Tier 2:-
Duration: 6 months
Funds: $3000 bi-monthly (every 2- months)
*Tier 3:-
Duration: 8 months
Funds: $5000 bi-monthly (every 2- months) and with an alternative of - $12000 for 6 months at stretch.
All tiers with monthly reports.
Conclusion: These are my thoughts to the present post, what do you all think, please lets reason together, Thanks
i think it would be of extreme importance if the Creatives DAO has an initial tier with pizza money, many many projects start really small.
I remember when I first got into this ecosystem, I think the first funding was like 400$, and after that we didn’t get much for a relevant period. Sometimes providing a lot of $ in the very beginning may be detrimental do the organic growth of the project.
I do think it’s easier to onboard some projects if there is the possibility of providing small amounts, just to break ice. ideally we would on-board 1000 projects in the near future, if we demand of all of them enough structure to ask for 1k or 2k, I think we are missing out on a lot of people.
Hoping to hear from more people from now on, sorry If I posted too much.
I agree but then again, we can’t deny some huge projects that come up initially. more funding would help go the whole 9 yards
Time is a very precious commodity and should be appreciated no matter how little.
Can you ellaborate on the word ‘adequate’ please?
Current (and also old) mods come from several national and ethnic backgrounds; what would be a suitable distribution, or how many mods should there be in order to cover the reasonable distribution?
Thanks for the question, Adequate means “satisfactory or quantity”, English can be quite limited most times, lol. I probably should have used the word "evenly dispersed amongst the major Nationalities in the community but yes, it is true we currently have Brazilians, Vietnamese, and Indian amongst the current mods which are quite evenly distributed Nationalities but I did say if we had at least one more nationality either from Africa or European that would be quantifiable enough. And yes I am routing for African or west Africa where I’m from to be amongst the newly voted Mods as the African community is growing rapidly here in the ecosystem and it would be cool if we had an African Mod who understands where we are coming from and how best our creative projects can grow and project Near to the African continent.
Something like having 1 mod for each ‘region’? (just googled this, there might be better ways to split it, ideally into 5 regions, maybe 1 can be anglophone countries or something, splitting the americas)
Americas (North America, South America, Central America, Caribbean)
Asia-Pacific (Central and South Asia, Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia, Australia and Oceania)
Europe (Northern Europe, Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, Western Europe)
Middle East/Africa (Middle East, North Africa, Southern Africa)
With all the comments and thoughts shared so far I continue to strongly see the need for the Zoom call on Thursday as suggested my @sarahkornfeld
And more so I am delighted to also know that there is an ongoing discussion and possible consideration about the important role Regions if applied can play moving forward and growth
My thoughts and suggestions are being put together and thankfully some of them have been mentioned by some awesome community builders
Thank you so much for the clear and concise text!
I’ve read it and also being reading the comments.
55SP DAO is quite new and I’ve been learning a lot in the past 7 months and I am sure these discussions and consequently the changes that will come will be of great value so that the DAOs can improve their proposals and thus grow.
Yes, seems that bimonthly funds will be a good way to give DAOs more time to achievements and organize reports.
One point that get my attention is, I can see a concern with PR/ Communication/Social Media as one of the moderators exclusively position
but I saw the PR/ Communication not really explored in the DAOs past months, sorry if this is a wrong impression on my part, but I believe would be good to explore it better and even to have guidelines on how to do it (apart from logo guidelines that we have on NF website we could have press releases to share in our platforms for example, guides on when and how to tag NF) and this engagement in each DAO could also be a metric, I understand and agree that web3 are core activities and web 2 non core as @frnvpr mentioned, but I see as an area that could be more/ better explored.
)
