Grin is a cryptocurrency that launched with no premine or dev tax of any kind, after a multi-year development effort by volunteers led by founder Ignotus Peverell.
The only source of funding for continued development comes from donations to the Grin General Fund [1].
Thanks to many generous contributions including two early bitcoin coinbase donations in 2019, and to the recent Bitcoin price surge, Grin now finds itself very well funded, to the tune of several million dollars.
The Bitcoin funds are held in a multisig wallet controlled by members of the Grin Council.
RFC 0014 [2] specifies the guidelines for spending the Grin Development Fund.
Funding requests are made in the Grin Forum, and 1-3 weeks later decided upon in a public government meeting.
Some community members have expressed concern that the current funding model leaves the direction of Grin development too much under the control of the 7 members of the Council and their vision of what Grin should be. A related concern is that a majority of funds is applied for and granted to several members of the Council.
In response, the Council has expressed a willingness to share funding control with people from the wider Grin community.
Following public discussions on what forms this could take, there are now 3 proposals in place [3][4][5], that call for a selection of community members to either add control of the single existing fund, or be in full control of 1 or 2 separate funds to be split off from the existing fund.
In order to streamline the challenges of selecting the best proposal and selecting candidates for that proposal,
we invite community mmembers with a keen interest in helping to fund Grin projects to put forth their candidacy and indicate which of the 3 proposals they prefer to operate under. All applications made before the end of Mar 2021 will then be considered in April to select the most prefered proposal and who will serve it.
Each candidacy should use its own thread (“New Topic”) under the “Governance” category on the Grin Forum [6].
Correct me if i am wrong: But do you propose to push only the ideas selectively that are made a few days ago? I don’t see for example my idea being mentioned in your topic? Why would other people then even try to join or add new ideas when the current sitting team is centralizing their own ideas ( to push them forward. )
Another question is also: What are the current requirements to take a request serious? It feels like now that with 1 yes or 1 no an idea can be stopped or pushed forward.
For those who missed Tuesday’s governance meeting, I’d like to restate the outcome of the council’s deliberations on the candidacies.
Of the 3 proposals, the simple split fund looks the most viable in terms of filling the required number of seats with candidates in support, and has the council’s preference.
Four of the candidates in support of this proposal (davidtavarez, hendi, mcm-mike, and paouky) are on the council’s shortlist for acceptance, as long standing community members with recognized contributions.
We’d like to ask candidates
who previously didn’t express support for the split fund proposal, to change their mind
who did, to possibly restate/strengthen their case
who missed the previous deadline, to come forward now
The new deadline is the end of Tue, Apr 20.
Then we’ll have a forum community vote (excluding newly made accounts) to decide on the remaining two seats (subject to council approval).
We’ll do approval voting by “Like”-ing the candidates you prefer over the others, who you refrain from “Like”-ing,
Note that liking all of them has the same effect as liking none of them.
Likes from accounts created after the original call for candidates will be discarded, as will a Like from the candidate themselves.
I propose we look at the Like counts on May 24, noontime in UTC, approximately one month from now. The two most Liked candidates meeting with council approval will join davidtavarez, hendi, mcm-mike, and paouky to be in charge of the alternate fund.