We're proposing a strategic initiative aimed at enhancing the Polkadot ecosystem’s infrastructure to more effectively recognize, track, and incentivize the community's contributions. With a funding request of $485,000, this plan seeks to cultivate a transparent and rewarding ecosystem, directly supporting our goal to build the Agents Program, a decentralized HR framework. This framework is intended to optimize the integration of talent throughout the ecosystem's various collectives, ensuring efficient resource utilization. Our proposal is structured around four critical development components:
API Development ($220,000 - 2 FTEs): To build a scalable and secure system for comprehensive data collection and processing, essential for capturing a broad spectrum of agent activities within the ecosystem.
Web UI Creation ($75,000 - 1 FTE): To develop an accessible, user-friendly interface for exploring agents' reputations and contribution histories, making it easier for participants to navigate and understand their impact within the community.
Indexing Implementation ($165,000 - 1.5 FTEs): To organize, store, and swiftly retrieve data, ensuring efficient, real-time tracking of contributions and activities, which is vital for maintaining an up-to-date representation of agent efforts.
Communication & Information Gathering ($25,000 - 0.25 FTE): To establish direct links with every program, collective, and bounty in the ecosystem, gathering detailed operational information to compile a comprehensive directory for agents and newcomers.
The total funding request of $485,000, equivalent to 50,817.27 DOT (based on a 7-day EMA of $9.544 per DOT), will support the project over 9-month development period.
For more information please view our detailed proposal.
Additionally, you can access our withdrawn decentralized futures application for background information on the evolution of this proposal.
Preface
It is another sad show of goverance to see this referendum (confirming -> passing) when this discussion lends towards a proposal that lacks detail and the desire for the proposer to develop a PoC. Put some skin in the game, take some risk.
To those voting aye, what are the thoughts around why this is good? I can't see anything useful from Tom's replies, have you?
We are not going to improve the state of governance by letting proposals like this one pass without driving good quality discussion and addressing reasonable questions... Or is it that these things don't matter anymore?
Could the DV candidate supply us with some general context as to their vote?
On to the proposal itself...
I don't agree with concepts of rewarding someone for owning a title such as Ambassador or the now trending title of ecosystem Agent. There is imo an organic steering of individuals who are doing good for the ecosystem towards revenue models. It is not an easy journey and many go without compensation for months or years to prove their worth and gain community confidence. It may work to their favour or it may not, this is imo a reasonable opportunity risk.
We've seen such groups such as the moderation, system collators and anti-scam teams use this approach, firstly operating without renumeration, then moving to a model of infrequent partial funding (like tips) and then on to treasury proposals. We've also seen individuals like Jay (Kusamarian) follow a similar path.
I agree that some individuals or groups require a push to get them along the way but developing a USD $450,000 indexer with hundreds of thousands quoted for subsequent phases is imo NOT the solution. Insert @none's quote of the day.
Low/no cost alternative
In the days of old we had a thriving tipping system, more so on Kusama than Polkadot. Persons (outside of the Council) were incentivized to find tips because they would (inherently) receive a finders fee of 20% of the tip. This is Jay's beginning and to some extent mine. If you've never received a tip, there is something cheerful about receiving the acknowledgement that's beyond token value. It has the power to motivate and for those outside the ecosystem, the power to attract.
We should encourage finders but there is at the moment no incentive for them to do so without specifically assigning funds to themselves. This may come with negative stigma due to public perception. We could either socially agree that tip finders can claim up to 20% of the tipped amount or we could try to build in some retro finders fee logic to the tip tracks.
Applications like https://www.dotreasury.com/ can utilize the on-chain information and present top finders, top recipient etc. This is also an on-chain system in which others can query or build upon.
All of which would cost the treasury less than the current ask with less complex mechanisms.
Regards,
Will | Paradox
Edited