Q4 Bounties for GWG Participants: (OCT,NOV,DEC 2022)

Thank you for your patience in our posting of the Q4 bounties (OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 2022) for the GWG, we were waiting for the final payment to be claimed.

Payments in USD.

Please see the sheet below for all paid Q4 bounties.
Our current Q1 invoices for January and February are in the process of submission. Once all Q1 bounties are distributed (end of the quarter) we will provide them to the community as well.

Thank you to everyone for your very hard work and belief in this adventure to decentralize NEAR.

Name Role WG Final amount approved NEAR address Completed bounty link
Robert Z Lead Tech 11000 robertz.near William / atrox1382 Q4 completed bounty rationale - Google Docs
Noak Contributor 5000 Noak.near Noak - NDC Rationale - Google Docs
James W Contributor Governance 8000 infinity.near James_GWG_Q4_2022 - Google Docs
Sahil Contributor 5750 sahilmassey.near Sahil GWG - Governance Lead Sep to Dec Payout - Google Docs
Sarah Lead Comms 8500 sarahkornfeld.near https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ls74YOY6-e4DxlRsSLlpa0t27CmYWQf3eQgekN8aOiU/edit?usp=sharing
Igboze Co-Lead CE 5750 igboze_builder.near Igboze-GWG contributions - Google Docs
Rebecca Co-Lead 5750 rebecca.near Rebecca_GWG retroactive bounty thoughts_Q4 2022 - Google Docs
William Lead Legal 11000 atrox1382.near William / atrox1382 Q4 completed bounty rationale - Google Docs
Ozymandius Lead Constitution 11000 tripi.near Q4 Bounty Rationale: - Google Docs
Shubham Contributor CE 500 shubham007.near Shubham Maheshwari CE & Moderation Salary from Sep - Google Docs
Aaron L Contributor Constitution 250 aaron.near Aaron Luhning Q4 Contribution - Google Docs
Dabby Contributor CE 250 dabbie3229.near https://docs.google.com/document/d/14CPtuzF_mezBrBXEoc0X-xy9QFZfe5_BG3_6_mshtxE/edit?usp=drivesdk
Psalmy Contributor CE 250 psalm.near Weekly report as a Moderator/CE - Google Docs
Prasanth V Contributor Constitution 1500 Uhthred.near Uhthred- GWG Retroactive Bounty - Google Docs
Gabriel A Contributor CE 250 cryptomuse01.near GWG CE WG Q4 Retroactive Bounties - Google Sheets
Alex Contributor CE 250 wonz.near GWG CE WG Q4 Retroactive Bounties - Google Sheets
Total 75000

Trustee vetting process (longlist → shortlist → interviews → final candidates)

@atrox1382 could you please share more details about the process:

  1. Link ok the governance forum where Community was asked about the trustees roles;

  2. List of candidates ; Selection , vetting process;

  3. Short list of candidates ;

  4. List of interviews, questions, methods, evaluation process;

  5. List of final candidates.


@sarahkornfeld can you please open an access?


According to this link-»Spreedsheet how come there was a clone report With Alex and Noak?


«NDC - Nobody Don’t Care»


Here you go, this one opens. Have a good weekend.



Have sent you an invite into that document.

1 Like

Where is information about Blaze’s rewards by the way?

Why contributors from Africa got rewards less than people from Europe and North America? My friend Psalmy for full time job received only $250


While I have assisted the GWG with self-organizing and help with aligning the NDC vision and GWG operations, I do not directly receive bounties from the GWG.

You can find more details about my strategic advisor grant here: Strategic Advisor Role & Grant


Rewards were based on the direct contribution of the individual. Attending meetings and commenting on documents was determined by the community as not enough contribution to warrant a bounty.

Bounties are assigned based on direct contribution to outcomes and the level of effort. The base bounty was $250 for contributors in Q4.

You can find more about how the GWG handles bounties in our charter:

At least two core contributors reviewed each bounty allocated.

Any contributor that is not satisfied with their bounty, please feel free to DM me on Telegram.


Still having a hard time understanding the tangible value of these bureaucratic structures overall.

Is the real value not in the utility of NEAR Protocol and released projects which realize said utility?


It’s important to note that the ecosystem is more than projects. It’s comprised of collectives: communities, workgroups, projects, and nodes and all the varying degrees within, including language, locality, and verticals.

As a collective, we have experimented over the past two years with several types of funding-related experiments. The NET NET from the perspective of NF and the Community:

  1. Impact was not measurable = Need Objective Criteria, not subjective
  2. Payment Upfront caused misappropriation - Double dipping, Non-Delivery, Grant n Dash
  3. Decisions made by few - Non Transparent, Frens fund Frens

Behind the movement of the NDC:

  1. Transparent Decision Making - Onchain and by the community
  2. Inclusivity - More Voices, More Collectives
  3. Adaptability - We know we won’t get it right at first
  4. Gaurdrails - Protect the Community Treasury from cartels, frens fund only frens, bad actors
  5. Accountability - What was the result, how did it help the greater community, the mission of NEAR

The community at large, via community pulse on the governance forum, has said we need/want:

  1. Objective approval, rejection and a process to appeal funding requests
  2. Council criteria, how were they appointed, how do they rotate, wen do they leave, who can be appointed
  3. Purpose and Value proposition to the community
  4. Who can be members, how to apply, and how are they removed
  5. What kind of funding, how often can limits be increased

Every Collective and DAO on NEAR maintain its own autonomy; however, in the case, they would like to be funded from the “Community Treasury,” the community has been very vocal about how funds are issued, monitored and results measured.

Of course, all will ultimately be decided by the community via adoption, voting, and adaptability over time. These are the first models of governance based on community input and feedback with a lot of guardrails to protect the “Community Treasury,” as it is our first foray as an ecosystem to do so. A lot of funds were distributed fast in the last cycle with mixed results.

Does this represent your collective stance Community? Plz hit the like button or make recommended corrections.


I appreciate you addressing this directly. Malign incentives are definitely a trust issue. Thanks.

Moving forward, what are the concrete steps which will be taken to support active and released projects rather than prioritizing vaporware?


NDC V0 Governance is in the process of going online. This includes the Community Treasury and the Grassroots DAO’s (Dev DAO, Marketing & Creatives) restoring funding to the community. Several of the DAO’s are moving toward outcome-based bounties, this ensures the objectives are completed first, then rewards are distributed.

Projects will have the ability to request funding from these DAO’s. NF did a blog post with links to their processes and they are here on the forum as well.