In simple terms, Gitcoin is a platform where members of the cryptocurrency community can donate to new, budding open source projects they'd like to see completed. The focus is on "public goods", which for an ecosystem can mean anything supporting growth.
In order to be eligible to earn grants, "grantees" must meet Gitcoin's general criteria (no fraud/deceit/impersonation) as well as other ecosystem program criteria.
Looking back on Main Rounds & Layer-1 Ecosystem Rounds, we get a general idea of what that criteria may look like:
🔹 No prior VC funding received over $500k
🔹 Must be open source, must be legal
🔹Cannot include quid-pro-quo activity (promising something of value in exchange for donation)
🔹Must directly advance the protocol's ecosystem
🔹Project forks must show meaningful improvements
🔹 The received grant should focus on accomplishing: Usability, Community Growth, Tooling, Infrastructure, Security, Education, Application.
*As a reminder, none of these criterion reflect the official Fantom eligibility criteria - these are guidelines found in previous rounds.
If I had a project preparing for when #Fantom has their own Gitcoin program, I would:
🔹Ready a Github account
🔹Draft an explanation for why a grant is being sought, clearer communication is better. Imagine describing to donors who have never heard anything about the project!🎯
So how does quadratic funding (QF) actually work?
Its a bit complex, but can be simplified. Per @Gitcoin, QF is the mathematically optimal way to fund an ecosystem in a democratic way. The key being the math. 📐
Great examples shown in the video below 👇
QF let's individuals decide which projects deserve to be funded by donating w/ their own wallet.
Donations can then be matched by a pool of money dedicated to funding the ecosystem.
Like buying votes, there are diminishing returns to individual’s potential for donation matching
Additionally, the number of contributors matters more than the total contributions.
To expand on the quadratically funded donation example, 1000 donations of $1 from unique contributors shows there is more collective interest in the product than 1 big donation from a whale, so the project w/ higher # of total contributors receives more matched funds.
One downside of QF is ability for Sybil attack. A Sybil attack is when an anon user spreads their funds across multiple wallets & donates to the same project.
In order to prove unique donations (and not 1 individual w/ 50 wallets), Passport can be used.
Gitcoin has distributed over $64M in total, including $40 million through grants alone.
Given what we know from the March '22 blog post on the topic, there is reportedly 335,000,000 $FTM set aside for matching. This equates to ~$75M today!!
This will be a massive funding opportunity to builders across the cryptocurrency ecosystem.
I'm pumped to see which builders apply for grants, and what projects are being developed to improve user + dev experience & nurture community/ecosystem growth on #Fantom!
Have you heard about #Fantom's plan for gas subsidies?
It means: no more faucets, no more bridges, just wallets!
Let me show you examples why this development has incredible implications for dApp developers. Plus, huge potential to increase $FTM adoption 🚀
A short thread 🧵👇
#Fantom gas subsidies will allow a smart contract to provide the $FTM gas token for any user.
This is gone: send fiat to CEX, wait 3 days for arrival, worry about native bridges (or faucets), calculate gas on the main layer depending on congestion, all to get your first $FTM gas
Gas subsidy possibilities are endless & novel.
Example 1: A multiplayer gaming quest ends, the successful player now completes on-chain transaction to collect his loot. Cool, new armor! ⚔️
& the $FTM gas token for the txn was provided directly by the game's contract. Convenient
features are more interesting points than #Fantom's low gas cost and rapid transactions 🧵 ↓
True finality is the state of a transaction after it is submitted.
When a $FTM txn is submitted & seen by the network, that's it. It is final. There cannot be a chain reorg/rollback.
@AndreCronjeTech: "Results are time ordered & require no additional rounds of communication."
Why is this important?
For one: to be embraced by the mainstream, transactions need true finality. Users prefer not to wait any period of time while "confirming blocks" on their transactions.
Reorgs impact the finality of txns, which is not good for dApps UX and complicates UI.