Just to be clear Mitche and I have been (as much as anyone in crypto is) 100% badger since joining core team and 0cf has been a bit on the shelf (thank you to our small but patient community!). Excited to get it moving again in a way that works for everyone!
1 Like
thanks neal, always in need of developers! toss your info in here, just using it to get organized for now https://forms.gle/hm1HaCwdf5Yf5LMp8
@Spadaboom This proposal would be a lot more tempting to me there were already had a team in place. Asking for 1 million badger to build a product without a dev team ready to go seems premature. Maybe Iām missing something.
This is a VC like investment. We are investing in the team as much as the idea. So who are they? Do you have the skills required to make this happen well and fast and not to become another endless soon:tm:?
Based on the help they are looking for, it doesnāt sound like theyāre really in a posistion to start building.
More than products, we need to bring new smart devs and builders into the fold, not spread the ones we have out already even thinner.
From looking at their github, thereās 3 real contributors. @mitche50 is one of them, and seems to have committed most of the code. So how is this not distracting from our other work?
3 Likes
Iām more interested in the investment model tbh.
0cf sounds like an exciting product, and I appreciate most people are here for badger alone, but being part of the DAO that affords opportunities like this is very valuable, game recognise game, and I unreservedly trust the core teams ability to identify and open these doors.
Ultimately as long as my participation in this DAO as a Badger holder proves to be enriching from an innovative and financial perspective, weāre golden.
Iād just rather put this BIP on hold for a few weeks while the 0Confirmation group comes up with a solid team of builders with the clear skills to deliver that could be presented as part of this BIP. Then Iād vote for it 5 times over. Right now it just seems like throwing a $1 million badger at an idea without the people behind it to execute. Maybe Iām missing something. Part of building is building a team that can do it. Committing to more and more projects with the same number of people just results in so much context switching that nothing ever gets done.
Maybe the team is already there, but then who are they?
these guys?
Looks like a 1 man project and one of our core devs whoās already a full time badger. Sprimage hasnāt made a single commit to github since last august or something. Iād love to see more information about whoās involved and how committed/engaged they are.
Seems like right now @jonto and @mitche50 are the main people doing work/writing about this stuff. Is this more their side-project? Thatās great and Iād love to suport that, but then maybe we need to find another mitch and another jonto to focus on badger, and if they are going to be major players in this, maybe they should be pulling some of their salary from 0Confirmation, who will certainly have money to pay them once we fund this project.
I also very much agree that if we do this some of the badger should be locked, and maybe some of the initial funds should be paid out in USDC to avoid badger dumping to fund initial operations/hiring/finding people.
1 Like
So the protocol is built and live on mainnet. What it needs is more modules built (which we can bring in more devs to do using the 0cf token), infrastructure for token launch (which badger already has), and project/community management (which we also think we can source with the 0cf token).
We feel confident we can bring in the people necessary to do all of that while keeping up with our badger duties. The project has been largely on hold since Mitche and myself joined badger.
The BADGER going to the treasury (and locked/vested) is meant to keep the two entities aligned long term (DAO entanglement). Totally open to a portion of the investment being denominated in USDC or WBTC and earmarked for āoperational costsā. Also keep in mind badgerDAO and BADGER holders will be large holders of the 0cf token which in turn will have control of the 0cf DAO treasury.
Happy to address all of this in AMA tomorrow as well.
1 Like
Agreed about including half as USDC for the reasons stated.
Also agree it would be useful to better understand:
-
What proportion of the overall development pot does this $1m constitute as a %? How quickly will it be replenished at the current rate of income accrual.
-
a brief outline from 0cf of their intended runway for the $1m as well as comments around developer hirings and time split between the two projects.
Saying all of that I think 0cf is an amazing project which is sure to do incredibly well so I have no reservations around the seed investment per se, I just think a bit more colour should be afforded to that Badger community.
Keep up the great work guys!
I wrote my previous message before Jontoās reply so feel the second query has been responded to in part with more to follow at the AMA
I love you guys, but IMO find the team and then push the BIP. Or find some people to replace the work youāre doing at badger and move from full time badger staff to advisors on grants focused on another project. Seems like this BIP will pass anyway, but badger has SERIOUS ADD and I donāt feel this helps. Iāll listen-in on your AMA and not be a pain in the ass 
I also think this is a bit of an issue with Alberto. Also a great guy and brilliant. Iām all in on Force DAO, but is he focused on badger or something else? DeFi should be a place where you can focus on many things, but if youāre continuing to collect seed funds/big full-time pay-checks you should be primarily focused on that.
I believe you refer to the Replace-By-Fee method to perform an exploit by sending one transaction which you then replace while still in mempool by sending a new transaction with higher fee that gets picked up (confirmed) by miners and thus making the first txs invalid.
To reiterate what @mitche50 said:
The last point being the critical one, when a user sends BTC through the 0confirmation protocol the BTC does indeed get picked up and swapped immediately, however the funds on the other side, what the BTC has been swapped to (eg. USDC) will not be released to the user until after 6 confirmations of the BTC txs.
Might be worth emphasizing that 0cf is about transferring the risk of ābeing in limbo while waiting for confirmationsā away from users and instead to 0cf protocol and its LPās/keepers.
1 Like
Voted yes. I believe streamlining and simplifying Badger DAOās line of products is key to bringing and spreading BTC on Defi and onboarding more users. Hopefully this will help to achieve that.
Ah, right, missed the acronym. Thanks for explaining and you are absolutely correct!
1 Like
The point of joining the Annexe is to make bringing 0cf fully to market easier. Building out a solid, more focused group to work with us (while we remain at badger) is immensely easier with the support of badger behind the project.
Doing it this way we are doing it all out in the open instead of having a split focus behind the scenes until all the ducks are in a row. Up until officially joining Badger we were lining everything up to launch the DAO and kick off EC program to add more folks but put it all on the shelf to focus on badger. I didnt want to go out promising 0cf token allocations to people while at badger without having the long term plan in place. As stated in the BIP its definitely a unique circumstance and am definitely open to the feedback in this forum and the AMA tomorrow.
2 Likes
@Tritium interesting take, I can see the concern but can also not help to see a bit of a chicken and the egg problem. From my understanding jonto and mitche50 have not been been able to get to the point you would like to see simply because their time has been dedicated to BadgerDAO.
In this proposal they are in essence giving BadgerDAO the chance to absorb the value prop of 0cf not only for the added value it brings to BadgerDAO, but also to any other protocol 0cf integrates to.
The ability to interact with DeFi on many chains with native BTC instantly is something that has very high demand and no protocol (that i know of) have been able to solve. The closest Iāve seen is thorchain where they simply reduce the amount of confirmations they consider safe (down to 1 confirmation i believe) which in essence only transfers the risk to the protocol level and still requires 1 confirmation which takes time. With 0cf the risk is not transferred to BadgerDAO, it is contained within the 0cf protocol.
I personally believe this is a quite unique opportunity in the sense that what 0cf is bringing to the market (and already live) is something that basically all DeFi protocols lust for and it will give BadgerDAO a significant edge in expanding its user base. Just think about it, using a native BTC wallet to send native BTC and interact with close to instant speed with DeFi on multiple chains, and that is only one of many breakhroughs(!!)
The suggestion from @DeFiFrog is imo a quite reasonable balance to ensure funds are used well aligned with incentives.
2 Likes
Very much in support of this BIP - and seeing an ever-closer union between Badger, Ren and 0cf!
1 Like
This seems like a pretty risky investment for an already wobbly DAO. From my experience almost exclusively working as a dev for startups I donāt think this is a good idea. When your organization is already high risk, you want to partner with orgs that are extremely stable so as to not compound your own risk.
As it seems that few here actually read the BIPs with a critical eye, or have experience running projects like this, I assume it will pass. It seems all BIPs are viewed as āamazingā and receive overwhelming support, albeit blind. I think the Badger team needs someone with Crypto startup experience to run strategy and biz dev, it doesnāt seem like sound plans are in place and the product, especially DIGG, is leaving a horrible taste in early adopters mouths.
Since this will likely go through, I suggest reducing the risk to the Badger product line by:
- Requiring the partner to produce a solid roadmap and source a founding team of developers competent enough to commit to it
- Require the partner to provide weekly updates to the Badger community akin to what they would provide to a privet LP for the first quarter, bi-weekly for the second, and monthly in perpetuity of the investment
- Provide the investment in tranches depending on the partners ability to maintain and adjust an adequate roadmap
- Disperse the investment in a way that limits the selling pressure on $Badger or $Digg
- Allow the BadgerDAO first rights to pro-rata in future fundraising events
Since I have seen nothing in writing to the above, and quite honestly not nearly enough information for me to make an investment in a risky startup, I vote no.
1 Like
Agreed, but then 3 points.
1: We should quickly find more people that can do mitche and jontos job as well as mitche and jonto.
2: When this BIP starts Mitche and Jonto should be fully focused on that (in a badger pot perhaps) and not also involved in every other initiative going on at badger.
3: People shouldnāt be taking a full time salary from badger and taking a large grant to fund developing something else. People should be transitioning back and forth all the time, and they should continue to help out and work part time and/or on a grant/bounty basis, and perhaps transition back to full time if their project doesnāt work out/explode into something that consumes them.
Iām for this, and these guys deserve our support to do their thing that they put aside for badger, but part of that is about finding people to take over the work they are doing and handing over both the responsibility and the control of those tasks. This way they can focus on building their tool and bringing it to market and hopfuly turning 0confirmation into a thing that consumes all of their time and energy and makes them flush with coinz.
This one may be different as it comes from people who dropped it to help us out, but in general, projects should come with teams that add dev talent to our pool, not pull our very small core team away from making badger badger. I think both Badger and 0confirmation will do better if we figure out how to get people to fill most of the shoes @mitche50 and @Jon fill before they venture off on their new endeavour (badger pod, or independent project) .
Ideas are the stuff of all great things, but they all fall flat without the resources and focus to bring them to fruition.
2 Likes
I have to say you do bring in a unique angle which I believe has valid concerns. The part Iām slightly confused about is how it is painted as āeither orā.
Point 1 sounds like it is not within their capacity to kick off this DAO and let it run with a new team (worth mentioning again, protocol is ready, audit main thing outstanding). Would you really prefer to push them out rather than having them absorb a protocol that operates within the DeFi sector into BadgerDAO and make sure it operates aligned with Badgers interests?
ā
A thought that comes to mind, letās think of the situation from the angle of the newly formed (hypothetical) 0cf team/project. What would be the benefit to give up such a big portion to BadgerDAO? Assuming Jonto and mitche should strictly maintain their 100% focus on core BadgerDAO development with no involvement with 0cf.
If it is pure funding we are talking about then Iām sure we all can see how easy it is for protocols to raise funds in a bullmarket, and $1m is not a particularly big amount in comparison to majority of newly launched projects.
If it is pure integration we are talking about then same thing there, why give up such a big portion for an integration when the plan is to integrate with majority of DeFi protocols. What makes BadgerDAO so special to get such a large stake?
Iām not sure people realize they are actually sacrifizing their own free time (focus on BadgerDAO wont change, 0cf is only added tasks) for free to this community so that the 25% to BadgerDAO is justified and at the same time offering us a unique alpha opportunity to a solution nobody else in DeFi has yet been able to solve while they have.
1 Like
perfect. 