Nothing came up for

Catalyst Contributors

$1,100,000.00 Requested
Ideascale logo View on ideascale
Problem:

What full time contributors can be funded to help support, build and grow the Catalyst ecosystem?

Challenge: Fund10 challenge setting
not approved Requested 8.594% of the fund.
Proposal Assessor Reviews:
4.5 (30)
Yes Votes:
₳ 50,319,770
No Votes:
₳ 104,769,764
Unique Wallets:
382

  • download
  • download

Why is it important?

Catalyst needs more community members working full time in the ecosystem so it can reach its potential

What does success look like?

Catalyst community members solving important problems are funded so they can continue providing high impact

Key Metrics to measure

Tracking success for this category will mean:

  • Number of contributions to support Catalyst - Code commits, events organised, coordination support between teams, documentation improvements etc
  • Community support - Conversations with existing projects and community members and any contributions that help support them

Tracking success for contributors will include improving the reporting process so it becomes easy for the community to understand what each contributor is working on to support the ecosystem. Progress reporting is a requirement for contributors. The tools that are used to log and present this reporting data will need to evolve over time so that the community can easily track what is happening within the contributor community.

Challenge brief

—- FUNDING CATEGORIES BACKGROUND —-

Funding categories offer an effective approach for doing funding categorisation in the Catalyst funding process. Funding categories if fully adopted can remove the issues and inefficiencies surrounding challenge settings.

Funding categorisation has a number of properties that can be analysed. Categorisation can be broad or specific, inclusive or exclusive and recurring or changing. Funding categories have been created based off the properties which are more effective for funding categorisation. Funding categories focus on being broad, inclusive and recurring - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/funding-categorisation-analysis/categorisation-properties>

Using more effective categorisation properties results in a number of advantages. Funding categories offer a more efficient, simple, flexible, scalable and egalitarian approach to do funding categorisation than challenge settings. Funding categories are effective for directing funding and also help to increase healthy competition - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/funding-categorisation-analysis/funding-categories-advantages/overview>

Funding categories achieve similar or often better outcomes than challenge settings for ensuring each focus area has access to funding in a given funding round - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/funding-categorisation-analysis/historical-analysis-and-comparisons/funding-access-for-each-focus-area>

Funding categories provide a 80% total cost reduction when used as a replacement to challenge settings. The numbers used for this estimation are also conservative - the savings are likely higher! Read more here - <https://docs.catalystcontributoars.org/funding-categorisation-analysis/historical-analysis-and-comparisons/categorisation-overall-cost-comparison>

The full list of funding categories can be found here - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/catalyst-funding-categories/>

—- BUDGET WEIGHTING VOTE —-

The total budget that gets applied to each funding category is determined using a democratic budget weighting vote.

Funding categories are assigned a percentage by each voting participant in the vote. A weighted average percentage is then achieved from the voting results. This percentage is then converted into the equivalent ADA value that will be requested for that funding category from the total amount of funding that will be available in the next round.

To register and participate in the budget weighting vote you can find all of the details in this funding categories documentation - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/catalyst-funding-categories/budget-weighting-votes/fund-9>

—-

Overview

Catalyst Contributors is a group of community members voted on by the community to help support and drive the ecosystem forward full time. Contributor roles can include developers, coordinators, analysts, designers and more or a mixture of different expertise. The contributors can be seen as a glue that helps bring the Catalyst ecosystem together and maximise collaboration and impactful outcomes within the community.

To read the full background, analysis and current documentation for Catalyst Contributors please visit - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/catalyst-contributors/>

Why is this category needed?

There is a benefit to consider other funding models rather than idea based funding. Strong ecosystems are built on good ideas that are well executed. However the ecosystem also relies on impactful community contributors. The future of funding through Catalyst benefits from both funding ideas and full time contributors.

The analysis behind how this contributor focussed category was created can be found here - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/contributor-analysis/>

What roles can I apply for?

  • Roles - Development, Coordination, Analysis, QA &amp; Auditing, Marketing, Product and Design
  • Role details - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/catalyst-contributors/contributor/roles>

Catalyst contributors candidate - What should be included in the proposal?

A guide for Catalyst contributor candidate proposals can be found here - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/catalyst-contributors/contributor-guides/candidate-proposal-guide>

Catalyst contributors budget guidelines - What budget should a contributor request?

Budget range guidance for Catalyst contributors were defined using research on the average salaries for different roles. Candidates are not forced to follow the guidance provided. The suggested budget ranges for Catalyst contributors can be found here - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/catalyst-contributors/category-proposal/fund-9/budget-ranges>

Catalyst contributors minimum thresholds - Is there a minimum number of contributors for each role?

Minimum thresholds have been added to make sure the right amount of each skill set is selected in each cohort of contributors. The minimum thresholds for this fund can be found here - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/catalyst-contributors/category-proposal/fund-9/minimum-thresholds>

What is expected from successful candidates?

  • Support the ecosystem - Contributors should focus on returning the highest value to the ecosystem and look to solve the largest problems the community is facing at the time. Those problem areas could include support for improving or creating tools, coordination, resolving governance issues, improving user experience etc.
  • Support the community - Contributors should understand the ecosystem and be able to help the community where it's needed. That could be answering questions, pointing people to the right resources or bringing more awareness to different areas of the ecosystem that need support.
  • High collaboration - Contributors have the power to be the glue that brings the community together and identifies overlapping or duplicated efforts. The community benefits by contributors spending time understanding different related projects and bringing those together where it would be a benefit to them and the ecosystem.
  • High participation - To be highly effective contributors will need to understand what is happening across the ecosystem to the best of their ability. Contributors may sensibly focus on one or a few areas within the ecosystem where they ensure they are up to date and are aware of the problems, projects, teams and roadmap.
  • Flexible - Contributors will be most impactful if they are able to be flexible in a fast moving environment and move to where they will have the most impact.

What should contributors report?

  • Progress reports - Contributors will report weekly progress reports on what they have been working on in the community, any blockers they have and anything else they feel is relevant.
  • KPI reports - Contributors would not need to report KPI reports like normal idea focussed proposals do. Instead they would focus on increased regularity of progress reports that keep the community up to date on how they are contributing to the ecosystem.

What sort of candidates are most suitable?

  • Approachable - You understand the community will reach out to you regularly and will need to be friendly and supportive to community members.
  • Outcome focussed - You understand that the problems within any ecosystem are complex and take time to overcome but are able to communicate and collaborate on finding solutions.
  • Open minded - You have insights but are always open to new ideas on how to solve a problem. You look to include all perspectives when solving problems.
  • Pragmatic - You understand solving problems often doesn't start with the perfect solution. You understand the difference between short and long term thinking and how to prioritise what is most important and achievable.

What candidates may be less suitable?

  • Idea focussed - You have a great idea and want to work on it full time. This candidate is less suitable to become a contributor as contributors should not be tied to a single idea. Instead contributors are a collaborative force that helps pull ideas and teams together. This person can make a proposal for their idea if that's where they want to focus their time.
  • Wants full autonomy and independence - Candidates will need to regularly communicate and collaborate with many community members, ideas and projects regularly. If a candidate wants full autonomy and independence to solve problems then they are likely better suited to idea focussed proposals rather than becoming a Catalyst contributor.

Community advisors - How candidates should be assessed

Community advisors should use the following guide when assessing a Catalyst contributor candidate proposal - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/catalyst-contributors/contributor-guides/candidate-assessment-guide>

Community efforts that will support success

  • Proposal support - Help candidates propose a fair budget and salary expectations for their application. Guide candidates to add more proof of existing contributions or professional background where necessary.
  • Progress report reviews - Check on execution of reported progress by candidates to ensure it meets the standards and expectations of the community. Flag and report candidates where necessary for wider community review.

Future improvements for full time contributors

There are a number of improvements that can be integrated into the model of full time contributors that help support different areas of the ecosystem. A list of ideas can be found here - <https://docs.catalystcontributors.org/contributor-analysis/contributor-analysis/contributor-future-improvements>

Community Advisor Reviews

Impact / Alignment

4.7 / 5
10 Reviews

Does the proposal effectively addresses the challenge?

Community Reviews (10)

Commenter gravatar

PACE is a community led project that aims to redefine the funding challenges. In essence, they ask for the entire funding available in F10, and offer a unique distribution along several categories which have been previously selected by the community through a complex mechanism, culminating with an open vote for whomever wanted to take part. Any voter entirely supporting their approach should thus vote for the encompassing “Funding Categories Full Fund”. If, however, one feels that the approach goes a bit too far, this proposal is simply one piece of PACE’s puzzle. This fresh alternative to the classical challenge setting process overcomes many downsides (low entry barriers for malicious actors, unilateral budget weighting, limited understanding of challenge teams, suboptimal time consumption, etc.) and aims to be more efficient, flexible, scalable as well as legitimate. Let’s see if it also has the capacity to deliver on of the strategic goals from Fund 9.

Can it help prepare a group of people willing and able to make contributions to the ecosystem? Catalyst Contributors challenge, if implemented, will be in a unique position to help prepare many diverse groups to contribute to the ecosystem. First, there are extremely well thought out principles and requirements to join / apply for funding under the challenge, so the first relevant group will be the actual contributors themselves, who will have to adhere to the rules and guidelines set out by the challenge. Second, the activity of the contributors will also have a direct effect on other Catalyst members (proposers, assessors) since their job will be to support these other roles, and thus prepare them better to fulfill the requirements for their respective position.

Can it turn Cardano into an open source project and attract developers? To a lesser extent, since this challenge is not mainly focused on developer projects. However, since the contributors working on the technical side will already be immersing themselves into an open source ecosystem, it is unlikely that the ethos of the community will be affected in any way.

Can it help build real-world solutions based on the Cardano? There would only be indirect effects here, since, again, we are not dealing with a challenge that supports building real projects. However, it is likely that contributors can enable proposers to better understand the opportunities within Catalyst and to connect them with outside needs for real world applications. In conclusion the effects of this challenge on real world solutions would most likely be significant, albeit long term, indirect and difficult to measure.

Can this challenge improve tooling to support human processes in Catalyst? This challenge will provide extensive opportunities to support the Catalyst processes, since this is exactly where its focus lies. The contributors will be encouraged to focus on solving the biggest community’s problems (creating tools, coordinating, improving everyone’s experience) but also to offer general support through answering questions or generally raising awareness to the areas that need support, in a similar fashion to what the Catalyst Circle does today.

In conclusion this challenge is well aligned with the Fund 9 strategic goals.

Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

This challenge involves selecting community members through Catalyst voting to support the Catalyst ecosystem by being available full-time. It is essential as we need full-time people to work in the Catalyst ecosystem as Catalyst progresses into the future and funding an ever-increasing number of proposals. Hence we need many people to coordinate with many initiatives and assist the proposers and others in achieving the desired goals and contributing to the broader Cardano ecosystem.

The author meticulously worked on the challenge categories, and for this category, also he provided the required details from multiple aspects. For example, he stated what roles are available, in what numbers, and what is expected from the people applying for the positions. Additionally, he guided the Proposal Assessors in assessing the proposals under this challenge.

This challenge category is similar to other ‘Cardano contributors’ category with the difference that it focuses on wider Cardano space, and this challenge category is confined to Catalyst.

This challenge directly helps with at least two strategic goals, such as bringing in able people who want to contribute to the Cardano space. As the selected people will be responsible for coordinating with the builders and developers to execute their proposals successfully, thus they are helping to grow the Cardano DApps and Developer ecosystem. As Charles recently said about moving from a triparty control system to a more community-governed system, we need to have full-time people supporting the Catalyst ecosystem. Hence this challenge category is essential. Therefore I am rating it five stars.=

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2811
Total QA Ratings
8
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

This challenge category proposal aligns well with Fund 10’s strategic goals and critical missions which both Cardano and Catalyst communities want to accomplish. Firstly, this will improve the quality of talents the community attracts. These talents will be diverse enough to cover in a balanced fashion major functions required by our community. Secondly, since these appointed contributors are finely compensated and rewarded professionals by Catalyst, the community can retain a good portion of the ownership of the works made by the contributors and then Catalyst as a communal effort will absolutely want these works to be open-source for the sake of communal advancement in Cardano. Lastly, the framework and process modelled, analysed, and detailed in the documentation proposer PACE made about Catalyst Contributor will directly improve and support the human processes in Catalyst since the model gives both clearer means and ends in specific relation to this strategic goal. I would also like to mention that the study done by PACE regarding this topic is much more refined compared to the previous submission in Fund 8, which I took time to study and compare. The current documentation in Fund 9 has much more details such as more theoretical ground, comparative study and analysis, and work structures. I also want to especially point out about the clearer methods on how to execute this challenge or category setting. I am confident this fact states that the team behind the proposal is serious and well-thought about improving Cardano and Catalyst based on the dedication shown and visible in the studies. Therefore, I think a solid 5 star for alignment is not too many and I wish the best of luck for this challenge setting proposal.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2482
Total QA Ratings
9
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

This challenge is unique in that it invites people to propose themselves as full time workers within the ecosystem. It is very much aligned with the strategic goals for fund 10 – primarily as it prepares people to contribute to the ecosystem. However, it is also a crucial (indirect) stepping stone towards creating a lively open source ecosystem through direct efforts to open source by people applying for this or by improving human processes as more people are given opportunities to work full time with Cardano – with people employed to facilitate public goods, the ecosystem benefits directly. As a protocol that takes pride in its focus on governance, this is a natural challenge to that end.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2447
Total QA Ratings
7
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

While I am generally sympathetic to the overall Funding Categories experiment from (pace) these two "Contributor" challenge settings (the other is for Cardano Contributors) seem to be getting quite ahead of themselves.

On their face, they are clever approaches to the problem of funding full time professionals in catalyst to be paid directly by the Cardano Treasury. If you saw Charles' recent roadmap whiteboard (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwP-omMwd3A) you will recall that he mentioned there would be an opportunity for members of the community to apply for and be paid for full time work directly from the treasury, so at first glance this seems to be in alignment with that.

But there are numerous important differences. The main one is Charles is talking about using CIPs to establish the process and accountability for things like committees, which is far different from ad hoc community voting and meetings due to the high degree of formality and oversight required for CIPs. The other difference, also along the lines of formalizing and accountability, is that there is already governance in place with Catalyst for governing the treasury, not so for this category (except what they lean into from Catalyst).

For this challenge setting, the idea is that any proposals under it will be for 6 month salaries for the proposers ranging from $25k to $60k based on how they describe their role. Presumably this side treasury would apply to allocate funding every fund via this challenge setting proposal.

To the degree that this proposal seeks to align with the long term goals of Catalyst, this is a solid idea. But in terms of preparing the community to contribute, it is jumping too far forward and trying to compensate before laying critical groundwork, so I have to deduct one star for alignment. 4 stars.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2436
Total QA Ratings
8
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

This proposal is part of a series of 'Funding Categories'-proposals introduced by PACE since Fund8. By means of budget weighted voting on various proposals, funding categories is meant to cover 100% of the ecosystem needs. Enabling community members to contribute full time on Project Catalyst could be desirable as they no longer have to worry about a dayjob and can focus completely on VIT-development and problem sensing. By doing so, this could change the lives of people actively contributing to the ecosystem. It is mission critical to introduce something like this at this time because it corresponds with virtually all of our current strategic goals and the overall mission 'to explore the highest potential of human collaboration'. So I fully agree that this challenge setting proposal is well aligned with Cardano's current mission.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2180
Total QA Ratings
12
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

I am convinced that what we are building in Catalyst, including its successes and failures, are the basis for a new type of governance, which is and will be novel not only in the industry in which we are, but can be taken as a reference for many other areas of application. I see this proposal to challenge as simply the next step in the series of experiments we are doing as a community. This is my fifth fund in Catalyst and I have experienced firsthand the growth and passion of many of the members. Many of them have devoted some of their time and energy to facilitating different discussion spaces, researching different topics, preparing proposals for improvement of the projects in Catalyst, and conducting data consolidations and analyses, among many other things which show the passion of its members. This challenge seeks to attract all these collaborators who in one way or another contribute to the community from their possibilities, to consider being full-time contributors to Cardano. So it is more than obvious where the description of this category and Cardano's mission align. When contrasted with the strategic goals for the next fund I can understand that this challenge will allow to prepare and strengthen individual efforts to further strengthen the ecosystem, as well as to improve (or create) tools to support Catalyst processes.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2142
Total QA Ratings
15
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

This proposal has a very different approach in comparison to other ‘regular’ challenge proposals. Instead of having proposals submitted, it would have candidates running for a position to work full time in Catalyst. The budget would be used to pay their salaries and their contribution would be focused on different aspects of Catalyst: Development, Coordination, Analysis, QA & Auditing, Marketing, Product and Design. I believe the concept behind this challenge is good, and it is fully aligned with improving Catalyst processes, which is one of Cardano’s goals for Fund 10. Although, there is one thing that decreases the overall trust in the challenge proposal, which is having a lot of information provided as external links, and these are editable even after the refining phase of Catalyst of closed. This may cause trouble with PAs assessing and with the execution of the proposal in the future, since it would be difficult to track exactly what was presented for this Fund and what was possibly modified afterwards. It is understandable due to the amount of information included here, but I would have preferred to see this information in the attachments of the proposal, for example. Additionally, I didn’t find the information about duration of these mandates. Based on the numbers presented, I believe it should be at least 1 year of dedication, but I’m not sure about that.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2110
Total QA Ratings
16
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

This challenge is well aligned with the goals to "Prepare a group of people willing and able to contribute to the ecosystem" and to "Improve tooling to support human processes in Catalyst." There is potentially a need for catalyst contributors to be able to focus their full time effort on Catalyst processes, so that they can think deeply about how to improve the Catalyst system. Additionally this will likely result in individuals having more responsibility and accountability, which could lead to them delivering results, as opposed to just waiting for someone else to fix whatever problems may be present in a more decentralized system. However, it's not clear if this idea is 'critical to achieve Cardano's mission'. This is perhaps a controversial idea, as there is some risk of creating a class of Catalyst experts that become deeply entrenched in the system, and this may not be the most efficient solution. This could potentially create more opportunities for corruption or wasted treasury resources. The goal of Catalyst is not to re-create existing governance systems with full time politicians and "government employees" but to build something innovative, different, and hopefully a more efficient systems that empowers the end users and Ada holders. This proposal also re-creates a system that is less inclusive of anyone willing to participate, as candidates for the position of Catalyst contributor will be asked to submit their full name, professional background and be judged based on their past performance, job history, education, etc. as opposed to the current system that focuses only on their current contributions to the space.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2108
Total QA Ratings
13
QA Rating Outcome
Excellent
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

This challenge is aimed at people who intend to be intensive contributors to Catalyst, something that currently does not have an established standard. Catalyst has been increasingly embraced by the community since Fund2, and many roles are performed impromptu and without remuneration, this ends up limiting the potential for people to contribute.

The Catalyst model since Fund2 has been fund proposals, but many Catalyst-related jobs and roles could benefit from a different model. Several roles in Catalyst need flexibility and agility to troubleshoot. In many cases problems arise and a person can simply solve it or wait for the proposal submission period in Catalyst to open, write a proposal, go through the whole process and then maybe receive funding. As a CA and contributor since Fund2 I've seen this happen countless times and luckily the Cardano community doesn't usually expect funding to solve problems, many just do the work and it ends up going unnoticed by many. The point is that we cannot rely only on the generosity of contributors, if we want them to focus on the development of Catalyst, we need to provide financial conditions so that they can have tranquility and due dedication in these activities.

Also, it is important to note that, today, IOG is responsible for much of the development of Catalyst and if we want to transition to a more distributed model it is important that there are alternative models for hiring contributors. This model of "hiring" contributors can be a way to test the transition in Catalyst development and Cardano governance from IOG to the community.

This challenge clearly aligns with items 1 and 4 of the Catalyst Fund9 Challenge Setting Strategic Goals.

For these reasons, I believe that this challenge is important in Cardano's mission.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2048
Total QA Ratings
16
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Feasibility

4.5 / 5
10 Reviews

Given experience and plan presented is likely that this proposal will be implemented successfully?

Community Reviews (10)

Commenter gravatar

Does the Cardano community have the capacity to address this challenge? There is already great effervescence in the current roles around Catalyst, most of them self-appointed and not remunerated. Many members are undertaking small scale projects having the sole drive to help the community advance at least marginally. This challenge will greatly enhance this capacity, since it will bring an overarching system to stimulate these roles, with funding and a very flexible approach to the necessary time commitment (ranging from full timers to project based positions). I can thus say that there is a perfect fit between this challenge and the Cardano community, and I have no doubts that it will be able to address it exceptionally well.

Is the budget realistic and reflecting the requirements of the challenge? The budget has been established following a vote open to all community members, secured by a few gatekeepers that anonymised voters identity and the vote itself, thus ensuring a high level of trust as well as legitimacy. And the results of this vote have been transposed into the budgetary splits present in the challenge. If the budget is realistic it will definitely be clear post-factum, if we notice enough implementation capacity from the community in terms of sufficient projects, sufficient competition within each category as well as a general good quality of the projects submitted. But the budget is close to a wisdom-of-the-crowd solution, so there has to be merit behind it. A back of the envelope calculation shows that, should this budget be considered for a three month period, it would be able to accommodate easily 70+ full time positions, or of course any other combination of full time + part time + project based participation. To fully answer the question whether the available budget is a right fit for the challenge, the community needs to first perform a scope of necessary positions in order to gauge the overall needs of the ecosystem.

In conclusion this challenge is definitely feasible in terms of being implemented by the community, with the small caveat that for the budget there are unknown variables and only experimentation will paint a more clear picture on how realistic it is.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2824
Total QA Ratings
8
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

If this challenge category is selected, we will have enough capable people who wish to apply for the mentioned roles to work for Catalyst. For reference, we can see several Cardano community members working full-time in Catalyst in different roles with different skills.

Regarding the requested budget of “1.1 million”, the author provided a detailed calculation in the GitBook link total of thirteen positions for seven different roles. The author has done extensive work on this category as he did for all the categories he submitted as Challenges. So, if anybody wants to dig deeper and understand how he arrived at the figures, he stated they could check the document.

The author does not provide details on the challenge team, but as I know from the last fund reviews, he and his PACE team does not wish to serve on the challenge team.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2811
Total QA Ratings
8
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

No doubt that the Catalyst community has the capacity and capability to address this challenge category since we have the prototypes of implementations such as Catalyst SWARM and Catalyst Circle, albeit these are still relatively fragmented. This challenge or category proposal will ultimately formalize these functions into professional roles. We also need to admire how comprehensive and deep PACE study regarding this Catalyst Contributor and upon reading the documentation I can see the step-by-step implementation of this challenge category. It is described in such clarity on necessary aspects from the rationale, functions, and working structures to salaries. We also have the vast resource of capable and passionate individuals who keep pushing the level of Catalyst to above and beyond. This is evident in the new members we welcome almost every day in Town Hall and PA/vPA group, be it in Telegram or Discord especially approaching every new Fund. We can also see productive and healthy discussions between members from time to time, albeit it heated up and became too fierce sometimes but that is the dynamics of collaborative human effort and relations in general. We can expect an equal opportunity with this egalitarian approach based on merit, be it to existing Catalyst contributors in SWARM, Circle, DAO, etc. or new people wanting to dedicate their time and effort and devote themselves to the betterment and advancement of Catalyst and Cardano in general. I believe we will have no shortage in qualified submissions in this challenge category since this will allow us to access a deeper and more vast talent pools. I also believe current contributors or people with critical interest in Cardano treasury and Catalyst funding will be happy to help managing this as the challenge team. Conclusively, I am confident rating the feasibility aspect with another five stars.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2482
Total QA Ratings
9
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The community has many talented professionals, as has been showed time and time again. However, many of the brightest have very good outside options and may not be willing to take on a risk to venture into their own start-up. However, with this type of challenge, they may be willing to give up on their old job and commit to Cardano.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2447
Total QA Ratings
7
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The biggest feasibility issue, and it is huge, is that there is no governance protocols in place for a millon dollar side treasury. It is one thing for swarm to hand out 50Ada bounties for timestamping, and quite another to "hire" someone for for $50,000 for 6 months. The problem is that there is no framework for establishing the validity of claims or submissions, the ways in which risk has been anticipated and accounted for, or even a basic code of conduct for participants. That all of these things can be designed isn't the point either: none of them have been designed. 6 bullet points don't make a governance framework.

There is still so much work to do before this experiment should proceed, starting with a formalized code of conduct, an absolute baseline of acceptable behavior from participants in this protocol. Circlev3 failed to make one, and they got dragged through the gutter because of it (and still haven't recovered). Imagine if the stakes there had been a million dollars. Second, a thorough framework for governing the dsibursements of the treasury need to be designed. Principles are a good start, but it involves so much more: trust assurance, clear objectives, roles for administration, documentation and HOW TO REVISE THE DOCUMENTATION…no matter what gets designed, front and center should be the ability of the community to both lock it down for security purposes (emergency revision) and short and long term alignment (formal revision of normative statements). And there is more, which this team will discover when they actually try to build a working framework.

The experiment has its place, and contributors should have options for incentivized participation, so I am not totally opposed to trying to move the ball forward here, but without critical tools, this experiment is going to be over before it starts, so I can't agree that this is a feasible attempt to address its ideas. 2 stars

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2436
Total QA Ratings
8
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

Budgetwise, the proposed budget of 8.59% of the fund's total has been determind by a community budget weighting vote, executed by 56 community members. This is an improvement from Fund8 as this numbers has significantly increased since then. Given the collaborative nature of Project catalyst, our community certainly has the capacity to produce full time contributors by members of our ecosystem. The variety of solutions that could come from this is extensive as the focus would go to whatever that needs to be addressed at any given time. This also creates the possibility to create solutions on a relatively short timeframe. Therefore I fully agree that it is feasible for the community to perform this.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2180
Total QA Ratings
12
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The community has been implicitly responding to this challenge, and thus demonstrating its ability to address it. What is the evidence? In my mind, the proliferation of communication channels, many spaces in twitters, data availability in blockchains, tools and co-creation of documents to improve catalyst processes come to mind. Looking at data in previous funds we can identify consolidated teams in the community that have been operating presenting proposals with the current funding model, for example, SWARM has presented more than 15 proposals in previous funds, QA-DAO who has two funded proposals and Catalyst School has 5 funded proposals. This challenge seeks to strengthen these initiatives by offering an alternative to project based funding.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2142
Total QA Ratings
15
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The feasibility of this challenge is very different to assess than the feasibility of other regular challenges. The first topic is about the kind of proposals to be submitted. Since instead of projects, people would be submitting themselves as candidates, everything in the assessing stage is going to be different. There is some guidance on how to assess the candidates - even though this is included as an external page and could be modified in the future, which is not ideal -, but we know from previous experience that having specific assessment guidelines for different challenges causes a lot of friction. The example is the Challenge Setting challenge, which always has a lot of assessments filtered out because PAs don’t understand correctly how to assess proposals there, and in this case the challenge is recurrent since the beginning of Catalyst. Also, the guidelines have some rules such as auditability shouldn’t be 1 or 2 to any candidate, but I believe some PA would give this score and it wouldn’t be removed in the QA stage, which would cause disturbance in the whole process. The budget of 1.1M ADA, which might be close to $500k if the price of ADA doesn’t change until results are tallied, is good but I believe it’s too high for a first iteration of this challenge. I would believe that this challenge would be less risky if the budget requested was lower, and if all the information was provided as attachments instead of external links, to guarantee that the provided information hasn’t changed. On the other hand, I see many potential good candidates for the roles presented and I think there would be a large number of submissions in this challenge.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2110
Total QA Ratings
16
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

There is potential for this challenge to create a wide range of proposed solutions, but it is also similar too, and overlaps with the Catalyst Circle reps. Results could be delivered within 6 months, but it may take more time for the wider voting community to get used to these new changes. This proposal includes information about changing the Challenge Settings to Funding Categories, which is a different topic than the discussion about funding full time Catalyst contributors. My concern is that for every full time contributor, you also need to fund managers or fund incentives for the community to oversee and audit the work of each individual full time contributor. The proposal includes the statement "Tracking success for contributors will include improving the reporting process so it becomes easy for the community to understand what each contributor is working on to support the ecosystem." in this case first the paid contributors will develop their own reporting processes, and then be required to complete them. There is a possibility for the contributors to create work for themselves that may not benefit the ecosystem for the sole purpose of having something to put on their report to justify their compensation. When incentives are no longer directly related to results, we could inadvertently incentivize unwanted behaviour within Catalyst. In the recent townhall there was discussion of creating a "catalyst parameter" that would be used to fund catalyst activities, and this would potentially be a better alternative to align the incentives of all participants than having full time paid contributors who’s true motives and intentions, and results, may be difficult for the community to audit.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2108
Total QA Ratings
13
QA Rating Outcome
Excellent
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The Cardano community has already been filling the roles of contributors and this has gradually increased since Fund2. All the niches mentioned in the challenge (Development, Coordination, Analysis, Product, QA & Auditing, Marketing, Design) are already being driven by groups and community members such as SWARM, AIM, PACE, LIDO, among others.

This challenge has not yet been funded in any previous Fund, so we do not have a parameter to project demand based on previous challenges, but the budget definition of this challenge was very well thought out and this can be verified in the documentation provided as a reference, where it is possible understand the rationale for the allocation of 1.1M ADA. The concept for resource allocation took into account the ADA price fluctuation, the key roles to be filled and the priorities of these roles, the market remuneration of these roles according to the OECD. Considering these factors, they arrived at a number of contributors between 9 and 22 for the challenge. This interval is important because it is what we have to base ourselves on to understand what the demand for the challenge will be and in this case I believe that there are enough people in the Cardano community to propose this challenge, both in quantity and in quality.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2048
Total QA Ratings
16
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Auditability

4.2 / 5
10 Reviews

Does the proposal provides sufficient information to assess and audit progress and completion?

Community Reviews (10)

Commenter gravatar

To assess the challenge’s verifiability, we go one more time through the process of turning the verifiability statement from the guide into a fundamental question and answer it:

Is the challenge well scoped in defining the measures of success? The challenge is extremely well scoped in terms of defining the roles for contributors and their duties in the ecosystem. It also makes it very clear what attributes are desirable for them (approachable, open minded, pragmatical), so there are excellent measures of success already available. Now, if the selection process will lead to community voting, this will turn into a beautiful experiment sitting at the edges of politics and business, since ADA voters will have to carefully decide which applicants should fill the proposed positions, and it will most likely necessitate more than a beauty contest to convince the community of one’s added value.

(2) Can the challenge drive healthy competition between proposals? The narrow scope of the challenge implies a very healthy competition will take place. One risk however is that the selection process will be prone to the same disadvantages encountered usually in elections, where imperfect information and mis-alligned incentives lead to suboptimal outcomes and even unintended consequences. I find it extremely important that any governance decision on the allocation of funds and the constructions of its supporting mechanisms are backed up by solid research, in order to offer the new systems the best fighting chances against these centuries old problems. Hopefully IOG’s role in shaping and nurturing the debate on this front will carry on well into the future.

In conclusion, there is a good potential for verifiability for this challenge.

Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

As I stated above, the author provided extensive details on all the aspects of this challenge. He guided Proposal Assessors on how to assess proposals under this challenge. In addition, he also stated the ideal profiles of the role seekers and what is expected from them. All these details will be helpful while evaluating the proposals and subsequently tracking the progress of role seekers, who will work in the Catalyst ecosystem.

Apart from this, the author also stated some metrics which auditors can utilize to measure proposals’ success and challenge’s success.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2811
Total QA Ratings
8
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

I think subjecting the contributors to weekly report about their progress, blockers, accomplishment, etc. will be beneficial enough to enhance the verifiability of this challenge category. Weekly reporting is standard method for communication and check-and-balance in most of organizations, both non-profit and for-profit. I am sure we still have room of improvement by utilization of tools in form of various software and applications in order to optimize and smoothen the works involved and assist members of the community with reviewing and auditing. Another point I want to commend proposer PACE with this proposal is several ideas for future improvement such as transition to DAO, treasury and rapid funding, bonuses and incentives, and flexibility through part-timing. This is a testament on how refined this proposal through last Funds and another five stars is the way to go for this level of excellence and commitment. To close my assessment and adding an afterthought here, the other positive side effect I can think of from this challenge category to implemented is the accelerated advancement of necessary infrastructure and tools such as decentralized and self-sovereign ID that can help with accountability and verifiability of this proposal and also the contributors through the existence of evident credentials. I hope people reading this just as excited as I am.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2482
Total QA Ratings
9
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

In terms of success of the challenge, two type of metrics are suggested. First, contributions to support catalyst (e.g. code commits, events, documentation improvements). Second, facilitation between existing projects and community members and any contributions that help support them. These lend themselves quite well to the suggested weekly reports that contributors should file. However, the proposal would benefit greatly if they did explicitly ask contributors to report on these measurable metrics as part of their weekly report.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2447
Total QA Ratings
7
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The best parts of this component are contained under the headings of figuring out what candidates are suitable, and what makes candidates less than ideal. The worst of it includes the assessment guide for PAs (which I wouldn't describe as interoperable with current guidelines), the suggestions for Contributor progress reports (no KPIs needed, just file reports and blockers…which hasn't exactly led to ROI for Catalyst which requires KPIs). There is a lot of documentation so I may have missed this part, but it isn't even clarified in what way funding is dependent on these reports or what is to be done around risks (or what those risks are) such as someone submitting inaccurate progress reports or being blocked on a difficult project. What is to be done when someone is working, but not delivering?

Again, this is a project that still is very, very raw. A proper governance framework, even just a skeleton with full complement of bones, could serve to be built around and would provide many auditable points. One of the most egregious examples from the proposal is the suggestion that by being funded from this, someone would have the authority needed to issue valid credentials…. What is presented here could not begin to pass for a trust registry with any actual validity. What could be issued from an actual trust registry for the side treasury would need to stem from peer to peer feedback loops based not on Ada wallet voting (though that could be given weight) but verifications between review of proposals and community acceptance of those reviews, and assertions of deliverables, accompanied with attestations to actual deiveries, and those attestations are based on curated standards, etc. Credential validity is based on the depth of the peer loops that can be obtained, and no such structures have been described here.

Because the experiment does provide lots of documentation towards achieving many of the ends laid out here, yet has attempted to create none of them, I can't quite get to neutral territory on this proposal. 2 stars for verifiability.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2436
Total QA Ratings
8
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The challenge setting proposal possesses a heavy emphasis on collaboration and is focussed on individual candidate progress and expectations towards such candidates instead of traditional KPIs. To determine this, candidates would have to file progress reports. To make it easier for PAs to determine correct candidate behaviour, PACE has included an assessment guide. Possible improvements for this challenge setting proposal would be to also include some measurable KPIs such as: 'number of candidates produced' or 'number of problems sensed and solved'. Furthermore, the link to cost reduction seems broken. But it is still possible to access the information through the website. So I agree on the verifiability aspect of this proposal.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2180
Total QA Ratings
12
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

For this type of challenge (aka challenge category) the measurements are also expected to be different. In this case it is critical to keep in mind that the nature and range of the services provided can vary considerably. Therefore, it requires weekly progress reports on what they have worked on in the community, as well as KPIs similar to what a standard proposal would include. When assessing the auditability of a proposal, it is important to consider aspects of the types of roles that are performed by community members. As part of defining a proper budget, determining what is expected of these roles, and determining how they should report back to the community, the considerations mentioned above need to be taken into account.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2142
Total QA Ratings
15
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

Due to the nature of this challenge proposals, I believe its verifiability is something that might be very tricky to measure. Since the scope is very open, the elected contributors could almost propose and execute anything related to their roles, and I don’t believe this is an issue in itself, but this increases the complexity of auditing their performance, and this should be closely related to the success of this challenge as well. There are some guidelines on how to assess their performance, but I believe this is something that is going to change a lot with time and that should be adapted and evolve as results are shared with the community. Also, I missed some KPIs related to the success of this challenge related to individual success of the contributors, like how many contributors are performing well, above or below expectations, since this would be a good indication of the challenge’s ROI. Other related metrics should also be added to provide more insights about the contributors’ performance. The first KPI provided is too high level in my opinion, “Number of contributions to support Catalyst…”, and the second, “Community support - Conversations with existing projects…”, is not easily measurable. In my opinion, the verifiability of this challenge setting is just ok.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2110
Total QA Ratings
16
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The metrics included in the challenge, to determine the success of the challenge are not necessarily aligned with the challenge brief which includes the following guiding questions.

What challenges will engage the highest number of voters? - This proposal may engage a high number of voters, but that may be due it's more controversial nature as opposed to it’s necessity or popularity.

Which challenges, if addressed, will provide a springboard for Cardano adoption? - It is not clear if this challenge would help or hinder Cardano adoption. There are several potential downside risks as I have mentioned in this assessment.

Which challenges, if addressed, will advance Cardano's mission? Cardano's mission may debatable depending on what community member you ask. However the Cardano.org/governance page says the following: " A Model To Marginalize None,

And Give Power To All.

Our current systems do not work for everyone. A better, more positive future is possible. If the world is to serve the many, it must be agreed to by the many. Consensus must drive progress and where disagreement occurs, it must drive creative solutions."

This challenge strives to concentrate more decision making power and Ada compensation among a small group of full time Catalyst contributors. Those Catalyst contributors will then have more power than the average ada holder/voter over the future governance model of Catalyst. Therefore one could argue this Challenge is not well aligned with the Cardano Mission to create "a model to marginalize none and give power to all." As it could further marginalize the general ada holders who are not paid as full time contributors. The same governance page also says "It is a blueprint for change that is decided by the many, as well as the few, and which will redistribute power, eliminating intermediaries, to improve the lives of all." so if one of the goals of Catalyst is to eliminate intermediaries, this challenge is contrary to that goal by creating more intermediaries.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2108
Total QA Ratings
13
QA Rating Outcome
Excellent
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to

Commenter gravatar

The definition of success is well thought out and complete, as it takes into account the pain points already observed in Catalyst and the importance of development in key areas. They will allow the performance of contributors to be evaluated in different aspects, such as contributing to the community and ecosystem in a productive and efficient way. Funded contributors will need to submit weekly reports with data and KPIs. The suggested key metrics associated with the reports and various items mentioned in the definition of success will allow measuring the outcome of this challenge over time in a practical, critical and broad manner.

The success metrics and definition of success for this challenge are very similar to the Catalyst Contributors challenge, so my assessment will be largely similar.

Assessment Quality Assurance

Assessment Quality Assurance is an offered role to veteran in the Cardano Project Catalyst Community. The purpose is to review PA assessments of proposals, providing a second layer of Quality Assurance.

Assessor ID
z_assessor_2048
Total QA Ratings
16
QA Rating Outcome
Good
Confirming your humanity

Write comment

Replying to