Hi Everyone, I’m Alessandro Cappellato Ferrari, Head of Product at the Algorand Foundation. On behalf of the team behind this effort, which is comprised of @Adri @trekianov @StephaneBarroso and @Loedn (myself), I’m happy to present the working document for the evolution of the xGov platform. The …

I somewhat disagree that everything should be retroactive. We might be able to get some smaller scaled projects coming, but not attract any bigger, more complicated projects. Sure it will help fuel the people already here, but working without a a runway is risky in itself. I am okay with gambling …

I have no problem with major strategic funding from the Foundation to e.g. Hesab Pay & friends. Mostly because of completely different due diligence. When it comes to the proactive governance funding though, I would a priori support @fisherman.algo ’s idea of a “crowdfunding DAO” over the one present…

Read the proposal from AF. Appreciate the draft. Here are my thoughts: Council Member Terms: The terms for the “council members” are a bit short, even with a staggered council structure–changing 50% of members every 3 months means more time is wasted having to transfer knowledge. I’d increase th…

Let’s analyze this step by step: Who exactly at AF is making this decision that we must stick with this Xgov framework? No one, we’re simply putting forward a proposal to the community on how the platform should evolve, the community can either get onboard and help shape in the direction they wa…

[image] Loedn: No one, we’re simply putting forward a proposal to the community on how the platform should evolve, the community can either get onboard and help shape in the direction they want or reject it, fairly simple. How do we reject it? It seems like all we can do is argue on this post…

I agree with some of the AF proposals and with some of yours. This is healthy. You make some good points and so does the AF. Here are my thoughts. [image] fisherman.algo: it’s too radical to fund those who do the most even though the community seemed to be onboard? It’s definitely not too…

[image] fisherman.algo: Instead, we have the same old Xgov, where people who ‘might’ build something throw a proposal in to try and get some money, and if they get some money, then they might build it, and maybe if we’re lucky it will be used by 5 people. Agreed. If a dev is risk averse but …

I want to share a collection of initial thoughts, some of which affirm elements of AF’s proposal and some of which would modify it: Guiding Principle No up-front or milestone payments. Payments should always be after a promised outcome is fully delivered. This rule is elegant because it applies…

Initially posted my thoughts on the Discord channel. So just posting it here as well. Thanks @Loedn for kicking this off and inviting the community for feedback. See many great things already discussed and some of them are also in the one below, so see it as an endorsement of the idea :wink: T&C…

xGov Platform Evolution

Governance Discussions xGov

GhostOfMcAfee February 23, 2024, 8:26pm 20

Seems like we should be put them up side by side to a full Governance vote. There’s time to develop your idea out while the xGov proposal is tweaked. Let both ideas be developed based on feedback. Then, the Governors can choose.

Topic		Replies	Views
xGov Beta Framework, Draft Version Governance Discussions xgov	16	1109	August 28, 2024
Ideas to improve the existing funding applications template? xGov Proposals Pilot community , mainnet	24	932	February 21, 2024
[xGov][Community meeting][New Version][2024/04/04] Governance Discussions arc34	57	2402	May 30, 2024
An Alternate View on the Future of Algorand xGov Governance Discussions	10	616	July 11, 2024
xGov Voting Session #2 - Retrospective xGov Proposals Pilot xgov , retro	21	1710	December 26, 2023

xGov Platform Evolution

Related topics