Please login or register.

General development donation pool

Hey all. With the great success of crowd funding Moneromoo's much needed development work I thought starting a general donation pool for code development proposals and contributions would be a good initiative. The current funding structure requires anyone with a plan/idea/proposal to make a post and go through the "ideas->open tasks->funding required" process. I believe a pool of precommitted funds would be more incentive to kick-start this process as it removes a major obstacle to actualization. "Will I get funding?" When you can see there are funds already waiting at the last step of the process, the reward is more of a reality and you're already invested/incentivized to go forward with your proposal. It will also possibly help tasks move faster, as a community/core dev/contributor vote can fund a proposal instantly and leap-frog waiting for funds to role in bit by bit. I'll start by committing 3000xmr, which will be funded to the pool if/when this initiative moves to the "funding required" section. Maybe it could be stickied there :) if the idea is popular. Let me know what you all think!

Replies: 8
chocolatebar edited 8 years ago Replies: 2 | Weight: -308 | Link [ - ]

@gingerale @fluffypony, You guys catch the kernel of my idea. Great suggestions for improvement. If you think there's value to setting up something like this, then glad the ball is rolling. Whatever form it takes to make it work; I'm happy with that.

@fluffypony, Hooking the addresses up to a general funding thread for visibility and a place to discuss general donations is definitely a good start IMO. Building more purpose around it other than just being this passive address posted on getmonero. Donations are more likely to roll in if there's a process to be involved in. Maybe building this idea around that is the way to go.

@Gingerale, As far as who gets what, when and how much. Good points on the details of delegating the funds. I don't have an answer for the best method. Hopefully others chime in to figure out what may work most effectively. Really, It could just be at the discretion of the core dev's just as any current donation funds that find their way to the addresses. Maybe a public vote among them and any community members who have verified their donations. Possibly a good idea or possibly that would be getting too convoluted. What do others think?

Reply to: chocolatebar
Lloydimiller4 posted 8 years ago Replies: 1 | Weight: -307 | Link [ - ]

I think a general development fund akin to what you are describing would probably be useful. We would need to set some boundaries as to who is in charge of it (Fluffypony?) and what the fund can be used for (not gambling site development or something that doesn't directly benefit the core Monero users). It certainly could be useful for potential developers to see that there are funds already put together which might sway them to drawing up a proposal for dev work.

I also liked GinerAle's idea that maybe it could be used to match individual donation funds to reach the fund goals quicker.

Reply to: Lloydimiller4 chocolatebar
chocolatebar edited 8 years ago Weight: -307 | Link [ - ]

> I also liked GinerAle's idea that maybe it could be used to match individual donation funds to reach the fund goals quicker.

Yes, the problem that arises is gameability. People may be able to take advantage of such an arrangement. It could work, just depends how it is setup. I think if there are no particular pre-set rules it becomes less able to manipulate. People can see the funds are there, but there is no "if I do this I can get these funds" angle to wile your way around the process. Say if an issue makes it to the "funding required" step and any of the dev's feel it's particularly important or needs priority, they can then publicly assert it as such and the core dev's are required to make a public vote (maybe requiring unanimous consensus?) to allocate funding to it. The funds then go from the general donation pool to the escrow of that funding request.

Reply to: chocolatebar
fluffypony posted 8 years ago Weight: -309 | Link [ - ]

Maybe the general fund should then just be at the discretion of the core team? Then it's a sort-of "I don't really care which efforts this gets spent on, so I'll leave it up to you guys to decide" fund.

fluffypony posted 8 years ago Weight: -313 | Link [ - ]

The reason we introduced the forum funding system is specifically to stop "bounties"...they don't work, and they result in sub-par product. Here's what we've observed with bounties:

  1. Invariably there is a major disconnect between what the bounty-raisers think something costs, and what it actually costs. This can swing both ways, but it usually means that they put forward a lot less than it is worth.

  2. The knock-on effect of (1) is that good software engineers, existing contributors, and freelance developers alike are all turned off at the prospect, as it doesn't appear to be palatable.

  3. Because of (2) you end up with mediocre developers pushing out a barely passable solution just to get the bounty. Not only is their code / solution sub-par, but they don't stick around to maintain it afterwards, because they just wanted to get the bounty, not to create something they're proud of.

Ideas can be proposed by anyone, but before it goes to a funding stage it has to be picked up by someone who can do the work, and who is able to indicate how much it will cost.

chocolatebar edited 8 years ago Replies: 1 | Weight: -313 | Link [ - ]

I'm not proposing a work-around to the implemented system. I'm proposing a complement to it. Just a general development pool for proposals that have made it to the "funding required" section. This way people can can approach the situation and present their ideas with some confidence that funding is available. Especially important if trying to attract developers, which from my understanding is something greatly needed. At the point that anything reaches the funding required checkpoint, it will have already been picked up by someone and they will have set their terms. At this point funds from the pool can be committed. Nobody helping fund the pool will be dictating the terms or level of funding for any given task.

I know the xmr dev's general sentiments on bounties :P Possibly using the term "bounty" was incorrect and confuses what I was proposing. Anyways, if it turns out being something others are interested in it's of course open to be optimized.

Reply to: chocolatebar
fluffypony posted 8 years ago Replies: 1 | Weight: -313 | Link [ - ]

Aaaah I understand. I'll chat to Eddie about it, because maybe we need to hook the general addresses up to a general funding thread?

Reply to: fluffypony chocolatebar
chocolatebar posted 8 years ago Weight: -312 | Link [ - ]

That would make sense, it seems.