Our Approach to Community Proposals at Secretnodes.org
Going forward Secretnodes.org intends to follow this process for releasing proposals on the Enigma Blockchain. Each proposal will include the following sections: Summary, Value to Community, who is submitting, background/problem, solution, feedback, disclosures. On top of having a structure, we also intend to continue to refine a community first proposal approach.
Since the launch of the Enigma mainnet, there have been various discussions regarding what the Community Spend pool funds should be used for.
Obvious Choices and Approaches
Use the community pool as one would use traditional fundraising.
Use the community pool to pay to develop things that benefit the ecosystem.
Use of Community Pool Funds
To be clear, Secretnodes.org does not view the Community Pool as a VC faucet. By this I mean to say it is not a substitute for SEED / VC funding which is usually given in exchange for equity. As such our approach to Community Spend based proposals at this stage of the network and for the foreseeable future will be based around subsidizing the development of projects where the Enigma Community gets the primary benefit of the work done and all work is open source.
Clear value to the Community
Our view is that the community must first signal its general recognition to confirm the value any community spend proposal will create. This can be achieved through various means but they all start with the off-chain discussions and never become fully confirmed until a community spend proposal passes on the Enigma Blockchain.
Budgets & Timelines
The budgets we put together will be based on nominal/modest amounts and exclusively focus on things that can be delivered within 6 months. In regards to higher cost things such as audits (when they are needed), there will likely be no choice but to pay full price, but outside of that, this approach is one more similar to open-source grant-based funding than VC funding.
All proposals we put out asking for community spend will include a clear deliverable. They will likely not be detailed on a granular level but we don’t belive proposals without some form of deliverable as a proper use of the community pool.
Off-chain then On-chain
Ideally we will always do proposals in 2 main stages.
Stage one is the off-chain conversations. This would be sharing details about the proposal for feedback and comment from the public. Once we get general approval from the community we will begin working on developing the concept.
Stage two is the on-chain conversations. Once we are comfortable with the progress we have made, we will continue towards implementation and allocation as we put any corresponding proposals on chain for the network to vote on.
Collaborative vs Transactional
When submitting proposals that include allocation requests we intend to release all information (including budgets) during the off-chain discussions. After collaborating with the community to make any relevant or needed changes from feedback, we will put the final proposal on chain. The intnet of this is to ensure the process remains a collaborative effort with the community vs merely being a request for payment.
The reason we are taking this approach is because we do not agree with letting the community pool fund expensive / risky ideas from scratch at this stage. For this reason, we will always have substantial skin in the game before we ask for allocations related to proposals, in relation to time and money already invested. We hope others follow suit and start working on proposals that put the community first and are excited to see and support ideas proposed as we get closer to unifying as a community.
Note: While I hope others follow suit with this approach you are all free to determine how to approach your proposals. There are no rules being set or asserted that you must follow.