BIP 51: Grants Month 4

Category: Governance

Scope: Distribute grants for Month 4 and establish uniform processes and frameworks for monthly grants

Status: Pending


  • Outline Month 4 contributors and proposed grant amounts
  • Describe the ongoing responsibilities of those receiving recurring grants
  • Establish new uniform standards for grant amounts and evaluations


This is the first month in which monthly grants have come under the purview of the Grants Program, specifically falling under the umbrella of Community Grants. As part of this transition and the continued growth of Badger and the group of people contributing to the DAO, we are implementing more concrete processes and frameworks for monthly grants. Our aim with the structure laid out below is to increase the transparency and equitable compensation for value delivered by contributors.

This proposal will first lay out Retroactive Grants for March, which includes project-basis efforts as well as ongoing General Contributors for March, including the function to which they contributed, the amount of their grant, and their specific contribution. Next, it will lay out the ongoing General Contributors on monthly and quarterly bases with standardized grant amounts based on the new proposed compensation framework. As always, General Contributors are compensated in $BADGER from the treasury. Thereafter, the proposal will introduce the new compensation framework and standards and the process by which General Contributors are reviewed and paid out.

As this is the first month we are implementing these standards, they are not set in stone and are open to continued improvement based on feedback from contributors and DAO members.


Along with project-basis General Contributors (e.g., design, translation, independent efforts, etc.), the ongoing General Contributors who are also listed in Retroactive Grants table are listed with their grant awards for March, which did not fall under the compensation framework proposed later in this BIP. Starting from April, however, the amounts will be calibrated to the new compensation framework, if passed. The amounts in the Monthly and Quarterly Grants tables reflect the anticipated brackets for each General Contributor, which can be adjusted at the end of the month during evaluations.

Retroactive Grants (March)

Name Function Amount Contribution
cryptouf#2315 Other 5 French translations
MorazanCA#3616 Other 5 Spanish translations (with an independent team: cheo0202, shenanigan#3630, enti#1546, Erik Suazo#8499, Valdo#1008)
flex#6512 Development 250 MemeLtd project support and NFT game (“badger-scarcity-game”)
Notabot, Fossil, Alfredo Other 300 Code review, project scoping, 3rd party integration planning
Pon Other 150 NFT jersey design
shillmoon Other 50 Art design for Badger-Cometh Spaceship
Lipp Operations 150 Project management and organizational advisory
mspad94#4791 Operations 15 Marketing strategy
Mogenrath#7398 Operations 5 Article writer
ron#2148 Operations 5 Article writer
ri0t#2144 Operations 15 Badger substack newsletter

Monthly Contributors (April - Rates TBD)

Our newest ongoing contributors are listed without specific rates as they and the DAO explore where they can best contribute in the longer term and the level of time commitment feasible for each.

Name Function Contribution
armitage#7549 Development TBD
c r#9848 Development TBD
Lipp Operations Project management and organizational advisory
mspad94#4791 Operations Marketing strategy
Mogenrath#7398 Operations Article writer
ron#2148 Operations Article writer

Quarterly Contributors (April & Onwards)

Name Function Amount Contribution
ethkaneki#7128 Development 200 GraphQL Codegen & BSC Chain
ethkey#8419 Development 100 General codebase improvement and automated testing
ewok #6735 Development 250 AWS, DNS - Cloudflare, security, monitoring, auditing, and smart contract assessments
flex#6512 Development 250 MemeLtd project support and NFT game (“badger-scarcity-game”)
Kerthmash#2764 Development 250 AWS, Cloudflare, smart contract review
saj#8488 Development 250 Fullstack QA
Tritium - VLK Development 250 BSC, Scout, AWS, and general automation
WARR!0R#0466 Development 125 Landing website v2 buildout (both desktop and mobile)
Ingalandia#9826 Operations 100 Content and marketing lead Operations 200 Events, marketing strategy, and product marketing lead
Mr Fox#2399 Operations 200 Operational structuring and project management, Badger Ambassador Program
andy8052/DrApplesauce Advisory 100 Member of smart contract advisory board
ArcSin2x#4335 Advisory 100 Member of smart contract advisory board
ETHAUDIT Advisory 200 Member of smart contract advisory board
fshutdown#3009 Advisory 100 Member of smart contract advisory board
Sam122 Advisory 100 Member of smart contract advisory board
Arben Advisory 200 Strategic advisor, including institutional expansion, business development, legal, and infrastructure security
BlackMamba#6054 Advisory 200 Strategic advisor, including institutional expansion, business development, legal, and infrastructure security
freewhol€z Advisory 100 Strategic advisor, including institutional expansion, business development, legal, and infrastructure security (On retainer basis for legal services to be charged hourly)
J Advisory 200 Strategic advisor, including institutional expansion, business development, legal, and infrastructure security
Mariano Advisory 200 Strategic advisor, including institutional expansion, business development, legal, and infrastructure security
Richard Advisory 200 Strategic advisor, including institutional expansion, business development, legal, and infrastructure security
U.S.V Advisory 200 Strategic advisor, including institutional expansion, business development, legal, and infrastructure security


Name Amount Role
blackbear#4259 125 Head of Support
Kryptobi 75 Member of Support team
sp7290#4859 75 Member of Support team

Total $BADGER Allocation for month 4 = 4400 $BADGER

New Compensation Framework

In the interest of efficiency and consistency, monthly grants will now be paid out in accordance with the following matrix:

NONE Project Low-Time Part-Time Full-Time
Development 0 Variable Variable 125 250
Operations 0 Variable Variable 100 200
Advisory 0 Variable Variable 100 200
Other 0 Variable Variable Variable Variable

*Amounts subject to change based on significant $BADGER price fluctuation.
**Advisors may be paid a bonus of up to 500 $BADGER based on performance and direct value delivered.

These categories are defined as follows:

  • Time Commitment: The level of contribution from the General Contributor. Despite these being described in hours per week, the Grants Program does NOT intend to actually play bookkeeper over contributors’ time. Rather, these are meant to be approximations.
    • NONE: Altogether absent and may be transitioned out of recurring status.
    • Project: One-off efforts, such as design contributions, translations (based on reach, quantity, and quality), etc. Please note that larger projects such as new products or collaborations should be submitted for an Ecosystem Grant, NOT a project-based Community Grant.
    • Low-Time: <5 hours per week
    • Part-Time: ~5 to 20 hours per week
    • Full-Time: ~20 to 40 hours per week
  • Function: The area in which the General Contributor primarily contributes. While a General Contributor may end up assisting in more than one place, generally, they contribute to one primary function. The following lists specific segments that fall under each function, but the lists are not all-inclusive.
    • Development: Development work as well as DevOps and QA.
    • Operations: Business & Economics, Content & Marketing, Project Management, and contributions that have to do with internal operations and management.
    • Advisory: Contributions relating to high-level strategy rather than internal operations, including legal, institutional, and security experts.
    • Other: The catch-all miscellaneous category that mostly houses one-off contributions or shorter-term projects. Many who fall under this category will be paid using the Project basis.

The amounts in the framework are porous maxima – meaning that each General Contributor will be evaluated each month to determine contribution level and resultant grant amount.

For instance, a General Contributor who was only able to work at a low-time level may be paid out for part-time level if they were able to contribute more time the following month. Likewise, someone who previously was able to work at a full-time level may be paid out at the part-time level if they were not fully available the following month. This allows for flexibility for both the DAO’s budgeting as well as General Contributors’ time, based on each person’s fluctuating bandwidth.

Though we have two recurring tracks (Monthly and Quarterly), these are not permanent, and contributors may be transitioned out if they are no longer able to contribute.

Other Models

Two segments will work on entirely different models, one of which is currently being revamped.

  • Support: Our diligent and valiant Discord moderators fall under this category. Support members are currently paid out at 75 $BADGER/month with Head of Support paid out 125 $BADGER/month. As with all grants, amounts are subject to change based on significant $BADGER price fluctuation.
  • Translation: We immensely appreciate enthusiastic Badgers from all over the world who have been translating Badger’s official English media into a number of different languages. Content & Marketing and Support are now working to assess what Badger’s outreach needs are, after which we will introduce a separate compensation framework for translations based on reach, quantity, and quality.

Finally, we are working on developing a track by which General Contributors can potentially be considered for longer commitments, including joining as a Long-Term Core Contributor.

Evaluation and Payout Process

In the past, the DAO has, on occasion, awarded grants for commitment or work promised rather than delivered. While many have fulfilled these commitments, in the interest of more sustainable management of the DAO’s operations, we are switching to only paying out Monthly Grant awards after delivery of work for that month.

The process for evaluation and payout will be as follows:

  1. General Contributor X joins in Month A (anytime between the 1st and 10th of Month A).

  2. Between the 20th and 25th of Month A, X fills out the Monthly Grant form (Month 4’s form can be seen here).

  3. Between the 25th and 28th of Month A, Evaluators (a group primarily composed of LTCC and Seeders) assess all General Contributors with whom they worked; these evaluations are both individually reported as well as discussed collectively by the Evaluators.

    1. As an example, X may have named Evaluators Y and Z as the people to which X reported in Month A.

    2. Y and Z each individually submit evaluations of X’s work for Month A.

    3. At a monthly meeting, Evaluators discuss General Contributors, during which Y and Z will address X’s contribution and advocate for the level of payout and potential continuation on a recurring track.

  4. On the final day of Month A (the 28th, 30th, or 31st), the Grants Curator will post the Month A BIP, which lists all General Contributors and how much they will be paid for Month A, for community vote followed by snapshot vote, if applicable.

  5. If Month A’s BIP passes, the data for those awarded in the BIP is processed by Finance/Treasury for payout.

  6. General Contributors receive their payout for Month A in the first week of Month B.

As stated previously, we are still in the midst of developing these processes, leaving them subject to change based on feedback and experience. It is our hope that implementing uniform processes and frameworks will mean better stability and consistency, both for the DAO’s operations and for those who contribute to them.

Vote “For” if in favor of the proposed Month 4 grants and new framework and vote “Against” if not in favor.

As a reminder, if you have a building project in mind, please remember to check out our Ecosystem Grant Application. If you’re interested in getting involved more generally, check out the #looking-to-contribute channel in our Discord!

  • For
  • Against

0 voters


Keep on digging Badgers!


Good recommendation. Project developers and companions have more motivation, their values ​​grow. Next time $ BADGER will be in the pockets of many people. The right choice for the future.

Great work team, well deserved.

I just want to congratulate @j.audefi for writing and posting an extremely well articulated BIP. This is exactly the kind of proposals I want to see, reason why I voted for without any further comments or questions.

1 Like

Not that it matters, but despite signaling support and congratulating @j.audefi for a great BIP, I ended up voting against.

We have a governance process that says that BIPs should be open for discussion for at least 5 days. It doesn’t say that they should be rushed and moved to snapshot the minute there is quorum (40 votes in forum). For me, adherence to our governance process is extremely important for the health of the DAO and I deeply care for that.

lol just waking and seeing in discord about this bip already in snapshot lol this is a joke hahahaha prob i wont come again to the forums lol i have seen other projects with no one discussing in the forums and no community engagement wishing for the level of participation and involvement that the badger community has but apparently the frog and others prefer to rush things and disregard the community whatever wtf i think that when price of badger breaks out to my target i will just sell and move on because no worth hodling a governance token when governance process is a joke lol it is a pity lol others wish to have this community and you dont care lol

lol you always saying this but no one cares lol why do you care lol

1 Like

Thank you dear. I just care deeply because I love Badger DAO. Our governance process is well designed, but that doesn’t matter if it is not followed through as it should. I want to see the DAO living up to its potential. That’s all.

Hi Team, really excited to be able to contribute to Badger DAO.

As a Translation lead, really excited to see what framework the team comes out with. The reach it has definitely matters!

-Let’s keep on building!! :hammer_and_wrench: :badger:

I can kind of understand why they did this though. I mean people need to be payed and the problem is governance participation is low so if they wait around for the full five days it wouldn’t really make any difference. Anyway in BIP guidelines it does say they can be up for less time in the beginning stage of the dao but it’s completely vague as to when that stage is over.

We really need to be finding ways now to build more governance participation if we ever want to transition this away from a multi-sig to a fully functioning dao. I think we need to try things like Source Cred and Balancers gov factor. As @jlpcrypto points out it is even worse in other protocols. This is a major problem for protocols to become fully decentralized.

I’ve thought about it a lot and governance in defi is broken. If governments want to crack down on this it will be easy to round up the multi-sig signers and shut it down. I doubt even most anon devs would be able to hide from the NSA if they really wanted to find out who they were. What we have now are little kingdoms run by oligarchs masquerading as decentralized. Now I think most of these oligarchs are good intentioned, I like most of them but they are mostly just focused on building out this budding ecosystem so they probably haven’t had the time to work on a better governance system. Throwing up a discourse forum is the extent of their governance.

In my experience over the last few months it seems most people will only particpate if they think they will get some direct incentive like an airdrop. Otherwise they are lazy and assume someone else will do the work and take care of everything. So to allow for maximum good and fully decentralized governance we need a system that directly rewards people for participating in governance that produces good outcomes for the protocol. Even people that have no technical skills can help by educating and promoting and they should be rewarded for it. Perhaps proposals and decisions should be presented so that if they are achieved those who voted for them are awarded in tokens. It would need ways of not being gamed but if people knew they would be rewarded directly for participating in governance in meaningful ways there would be a lot more participation.

1 Like

Many projects pay themselves in disguise through proposals, such as YAM, who have very minimal proposals.
But here at badger I see sincerity. Very good proposal


In the end, staying true to the process and working to make it resilient is crucial for these DAOs to work and have sustained value beyond pump and dump trading so I totally understand where you’re coming from, Cryptomooniac!

Great project,great guys,let’s rock the world

1 Like

You left out:

We’re still expanding as a team/DAO :frog: