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.
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.
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.
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:
Impact was not measurable = Need Objective Criteria, not subjective
Payment Upfront caused misappropriation - Double dipping, Non-Delivery, Grant n Dash
Decisions made by few - Non Transparent, Frens fund Frens
Behind the movement of the NDC:
Transparent Decision Making - Onchain and by the community
Inclusivity - More Voices, More Collectives
Adaptability - We know we won’t get it right at first
Gaurdrails - Protect the Community Treasury from cartels, frens fund only frens, bad actors
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:
Objective approval, rejection and a process to appeal funding requests
Council criteria, how were they appointed, how do they rotate, wen do they leave, who can be appointed
Purpose and Value proposition to the community
Who can be members, how to apply, and how are they removed
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.
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.
