Category: Governance Scope: Initiate grant process for rewarding contributors to Badger. Status: Accepted
Objectives:
Define the purpose of Badger grants
Outline who should receive first set of grants from the treasury
The responsibilities of those receiving grants
Overview
Badger has accelerated quickly and with that comes a need to compensate those that will contribute moving forward along with people would took actions prior to this proposal that deserve a grant.
Grants are meant to be the means for compensating fixed projects and ongoing operational support. These are people who’ve shown interest and have been chosen by the core team to fill outstanding requisitions from the job board. To compensate these contributors we’ll leverage the treasury in the form of $BADGER. Currently there is 7,350,000 $BADGER in the treasury.
To start I propose we do a 30 day grant program starting upon approval of this proposal and after that define if quarterly proposals are better suited. Since this is the first month there is some trial and error.
The core team have spoken with a variety of contributors that voiced their willingness to get involved in operations. The grants below will be to rewarded those people along with those that went out of their way to help Badger.
$BADGER will be distributed daily via the “claim rewards” function in the app.badger.finance over the course of 30 days.
These proposals are meant to gather feedback from the community and if there are grants you don’t agree with please voice your opinion. If there is community consensus around that discrepancy we will adjust accordingly.
Details
Past Contribution Grants
Jintao- He has created https://sett.vision/ the one stop dashboard for all things Badger. Grant 500 $BADGER
vfat- He created https://vfat.tools/badger/ as an alternative for users to deposit in vaults and see their Badger position. This was critical when we had UI issues in the first couple days. Grant 500 $BADGER
Ongoing Contributors
Front End Development
mitche 750 $BADGER
Backend/Smart Contract Development
shakeshack 750 $BADGER
gismar 750 $BADGER
Operations
DeFi Frog - Leading product board, job board, governance steward and financial modeling/analysis 600 $BADGER
kris2f - Leading contest, onboarding champion for operations and moderator 500 $BADGER
BitcoinPalmer - Partnerships, onboarding champion for operations and moderator 500 $BADGER
Niklas - Grant curator responsible for ecosystem grant designs and operational grant management. 400 BADGER
Product/Project Management
Jonto- Leading DIGG product along with project managing launch. 600 $BADGER
Marketing and Content
Ingalandia - Marketing and content lead including blog, social media, newsletter and bounty board. 500 $BADGER
DeFiFry- Content and blog manager 300 $BADGER
Graphic Design and Video Creation/Editing
Donald 350 $BADGER
Badger support
kryptobi 200 $BADGER
faces - 200 $BADGER
sp7290- 200 $BADGER
jakeminlim - 200 $BADGER
Fixed Projects
zashton - Development of DIGG app and dashboard. 500 $BADGER
vfat- Structure and implement DIGG Airdrop along with vault integration testing. 500 $BADGER
Jamlog - Will lead the airdrop v2 to resolve issues for any Badgers that were missed. This includes gathering all the appropriate data and preparing it for our merkle airdrop. 1500 $BADGER
Special Grants
btconethereum.com - We are excited to welcome a new project, btconethereum.com to the Badger DAO. https://twitter.com/lastmjs will lead this and through grants and community support together we’ll launch new and improved features. 300 $BADGER
DIGG Token Design Content = 400 $BADGER Total
Total $BADGER Allocation for month 1 = 11,000 $BADGER
If you are in favour of month 1 grants, vote “for” and if you are not in favour vote “against”. Please share your feedback and guidance.
I would like to propose that vfat receives a slightly higher grant amount for the initial creation of vfat.tools/badger. I was in the discord at launch with the buggy UI and I believe that his integration kept a slowly building mass panic at bay.
I can only guess of course, but I think that if not for him, BadgerDAO TVL would not be what it is today. I would like to see him receive an extra 50%.
I really like the transparency and agree with the amounts. As the funding source is from the treasury I would also really like to see a report on the breakdown of team and early contributor tokens to get a better picture of compensation and who is getting paid twice.
Amazing work everyone! Glad to be a part of the Badger family and be amongst the first to join the community. Let’s keep this community strong and positive! #proudbadger
honestly feel like vfat deserves a larger grant. this was my first time heavily participating in a liquidity mining event, prior i’ve only flirted casually with farming and largely stuck to trading. so when i supplied $wbtc and $badger to the uniswap pool and deposited the lp tokens into the sett but could not stake i was annoyed and felt like my trust had been misplaced. found the docs and tried sending a small test transaction to the contract “native.uniBadgerWbtc”: “0xA207D69Ea6Fb967E54baA8639c408c31767Ba62D” my transaction can be viewed here: “0xaafd283b1fc27e67dfa1bf19bb8fd1949acfce07142c96ec6b1e91bcf6b46d44”
after the transaction i didn’t see any update in the badger/wbtc lp token staking gage so i kept looking. found the community wiki with a link to vfat.tools and found the deposit function on his site. this experience was educational and i am extremely thankful for vfat! cheers
This may be an unpopular opinion, but as someone who has lost money in previous crypto projects, I have the following concerns:
Most of the current circulating supply has been distributed to users and liquidity
providers, but this proposal calls for a substantial percentage of the current circulating supply (over 10%) of $BADGER to be given as rewards for full-time work. While there is no guarantee that those who receive the grant will dump the tokens, it feels like the initial liquidity providers and investors are just financing this project with no guarantee of a return?
While I do believe an investment with potentially high returns requires risk, I have seen too many projects do exactly this to the crypto community: bring in outside investors with high-yields to finance a team to create a product that may or may not succeed.
I am completely okay with paying professionals to help make this project as good as it can be, but I’d rather not risk crashing our collective investment opportunity to do it. Am I the only one who sees this this way?
i know that the strategies are creating automated $badger buy pressure with 50% of rewards so that’s like constant bid, it’s also fixed supply so scarce in a narrative sense. i’m with you tho as a fellow newb and would like to see more information about the token model for $badger
I think we may add some more members to this list, as Ultimated Power and rod266 for example, as these guys answered hundreds of questions on the discord and really helped the community, especially in the first stormy days.
Not against grant, but not for this type of decision.
We have the choice to say yes to a list of +20 people, or no . Who proposed those people ?
Should we wait a few weeks to see the implication of members before doing those grants ? Seems to me that you are in this list if you push at the beginning. I when saying push, I think it the good term. Sounds more like a a dictatorship than a DAO
I thought some position still needed to be determined. Also, the thing we need more discussion here. Some proposal and post, were created with a vote, but not discussion. So then ok, 10 people say yes, without discussion. And it’s enough to get a grant.
I’m not saying grants are bad, and we should not do it. I’m just saying this DAO is (IMO) going too fast and is not very structured. You reward people with a lot of money, sometimes for a very limited implication. And it’s dangerous to build a solid DAO. Especially at the beginning.
@Spadaboom can we also start voting with snapshot ? Where holder have more weight .
You can see what happened with Gitcoin where people created 10 accounts just to trick the system.
A simple vote yes/no on a forum to distribute 11k for 1month doesn’t look very serious.
