GR12 Matching Pool Allocations

This Snapshot vote is looking to finalize a decision around the Gitcoin Grants Round 12 allocations proposed and discussed in this forum post.

Abstract

Gitcoin has historically utilized categories, based on Grant types, to determine matching pool allocations based on a percentage of the overall matching pool fund during Grant Rounds. During the GR11 Finale Event this overall strategy was questioned by Vitalik Buterin, the argument being Quadratic Funding should be just as effective during Grant Rounds using no categories.

During GR12, the Public Goods Funding workstream wants to test Vitalik’s theory that Quadratic Funding should be as effective at allocating funds as allocation via categories. By doing away with specific grant categories and having all grants listed together, we hope to simplify and decentralize matching. This is a radical change in how we’ve historically set matching funds for grants’ matching pools, but a challenge we believe will help to better understand how to best implement Quadratic Funding.

The forum post outlines the above in more detail –- and this Snapshot vote will decide if and how we test this approach in GR12.

Vote

The three options to vote on are:

Option 1: Single Pool Experiment

Use GR12 as a test case to run an experiment whereby we do away with categories.

The GR12 main pool will be a single matching pool fund/distribution of $1,000,000 in matching for the round. No individual grant’s matching contribution amount shall exceed 2.5% of the overall matching pool fund (i.e., $25k)

Pros: We get to run a proper experiment and try out a new approach to funding

Cons: The experiment is an unknown vs. our tried & trusted categories

Option 2: No experiment

Stick with the same category-based approach we’ve been using in the past – specifically, run GR12 with the same categories as GR11.

Pros: Less uncertainty (rinse & repeat prior round approach) Cons: We remain in the dark as to how a Single Pool might perform

Option 3: Do a 50/50

Run 50% of the matching pot as a single pool experiment, and 50% category-based as before.

This option was proposed in response to the governance proposal that outlined Option 1. This was proposed as a ‘happy medium’ – going more gradually vs. doing a full-on experiment in GR12.

Pros: We get to experiment a bit while maintaining the category approach for half the pool Cons: Having both at once is more complex and potentially very confusing for grantees