DApps and Integrations
What applications will provide the most value for end users in 2022?
Community Advisor Reviews
Does the proposal effectively addresses the challenge?
Community Reviews (3)
Building Dapps and integrations is a key-components for the adoption of Cardano. Providing a challenge for this will ensure the quality of Dapps that are built on Cardano.
Disclaimer: my view points are shaped by my multi-year experience in product management and software development.
The objective of the challenge directly supports two of three Fund8 strategic goals: grow the number of contributors and grow the app and dev ecosystem.
Building apps and intergrations is one of the best ways to grow the adoption of Cardano as evidenced by the practical examples of competing blockchains.
The challenge allows for all types of apps and integrations, thus having the maximum possible impact.
For the above reasons, I have assigned a score of 5 points.
One thought that could further improve the impact of the proposal: what trully helps to grow the adoption is a clear differentiation/competitve advantages in the eyes of potential users. So, I’d suggest adding questions looking into the competitive advantages created by apps and integrations, such as:
- Which use cases with significant audience we can solve better than other ecosystems?
- Which new/unusual use cases with significant audience can we bring to blockchain for the first time?
This challenge has existed since Fund 4 and closely aligns with Cardano’s mission. It meets 2 of the 3 strategic goals.
Given experience and plan presented is likely that this proposal will be implemented successfully
Community Reviews (3)
Since the challenge has existed in the previous funds, I believe it is highly feasible that this challenge will engage the community. However, a fund of 2.5 million seems way too much compared to the $250.000 we have now.
Given the proposed challenge budget of $2.5M and previous similar challenges run by Catalyst community, the community can definitely address the challenge and attract new developers into the ecosystem.
I have made a deduction of 1 point because the challenge team (the proposer) consists of only one person, and it is not clear how much experience the team has with building Cardano apps and integrations to provide experience-based advice to participants. So, I set a score of 4.
The budget request is 10 times the Fund 7 budget despite the total budget only doubling. This is a massive funding increase. The challenge has 86 assessed proposals in Fund 7, which is the largest challenge but there were 4 other challenges that were comparable in size. This challenge accounted for 9% of the assessed proposals in Fund 7 but is asking for 20% of the total budget in Fund 8. A budget for half of this amount would be very feasible however I have my doubts that the Catalyst community has the capacity to address the budget of this challenge based upon the disproportionate funding cuts it would place on the other challenges.
Does the proposal provides sufficient information to assess and audit progress and completion?
Community Reviews (3)
Looking at the success metrics on this proposal they are in line with the proposal itself. Great idea to implement tokens into the success metrics.
The proposed KPIs allow to capture progress, by capturing the growth in the technical usage (transactions, tokens use, etc.) and community growth (the number of teams, etc.), which do allow to track adoption.
However, given the underlying objective of the challenge - to grow the adoption of Cardano, I’d advice considering the following metrics:
- The % of users brought by apps built for this challenge.
- The satisfaction of users with the apps in comparison with existing alernatives.
- the marketshare of the apps built in this challenge vs their alternatives for other blockhains, etc.
I have made the following deductions:
- 1 point because the suggested metrics did not fully capture that impact on user adoption.
- 1 points because the suggested metrics did not consider the user satisfaction and competitivenes of the solutions vs potential alternatives.
The assigned score is 3.
Th success criteria and metrics are comprehensive and progress to addressing the challenge can be measured.