Background
Name: @SEEDGov
Position I am applying for: Application Advisor
TG:
@axlvaz for @axlvaz_SEEDLATAM.eth
@pedro9992 for @pedrob
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SEEDGov
Affiliations (Currently I am working with, invested in, etc.):
SEEDLatam Gov, being a vertical from SEEDLatam organization, has high participation in some of the most prominent governances in the web3 ecosystem such as Optimism (Some of its members are Badgeholder, part of the Grants Council Reviewer and previously the team was part of the DeFi Committee and Tooling), Arbitrum (chosen as Domain Allocator in the Education, Community Growth, and Events category), Starknet, Connext, MakerDAO (Sovereign Finance AVC) and GnosisDAO.
Even though there is not a specific disclosure requirement in the application template, we can firmly state that we have no conflict of interest with any possible candidate for the incentives. We have no affiliations, receive any kind of payment, incentive or have close relationships with any protocol aiming to apply for the Long Term Incentives Pilot Program. This is a guarantee of our impartiality.
Why You
Why would You be the best candidate for this position?
About SEEDLatam Gov
SEEDLatam Gov, being a vertical from SEEDLatam organization, has high participation in some of the most prominent governances in the web3 ecosystem:
Here you can read an article with our 2023 review.
In Optimism, our delegate Joxes has been recently elected to be part of the Grants Council Reviewer. In Optimism, the Governance Fund grants process will be managed by an elected Grants Council.
The Grants Council is tasked with processing Grants Applications as per their internal operating procedures, reviewing these applications in regular cycles with established deadlines for submissions, and publishing reports on grant finalists for each category (intent). The Council is also committed to diligently assessing if grant recipients achieve set milestones and ensuring that their operations and performance remain transparent to the community.
Joxes has been elected to be part of the Grants Council Reviewer, particularly in the Builders Sub-Committee. His tasks will be similar to the proposed Application Advisor position: to maximize the number of builders building projects in the Optimism ecosystem by publishing forms, rubrics and giving feedback to projects.
Also, Joxes has been recently elected to be part of the Anticapture Comission, all which highlights our ethics, impartiality, and commitment to decentralization.
In MakerDAO we’ve engaged with the ecosystem in a different way than in the traditional delegate system: the Aligned Votter Committee. During 2023, we conducted 26 MKR holders & delegates meetings (called subcommittee meetings), where we invited guests to discuss various aspects of the Maker ecosystem, both ecosystem actors and outsiders. The aim was to provide different perspectives and contribute alternative approaches to the forms and tools traditionally used in the protocol.
This high-quality and diverse governance participation gave us a critical and objective perspective. We have reviewed proposals from multiple applicants for various types of programs and have questioned, critiqued, and supported them when we deemed it appropriate.
In Arbitrum currently we are part of the development of the Arbitrum Education, Community Growth and Events domain.The work performed in the domain allocator also has lot of similarities with the one needed for the LTIP: Proposals are evaluated in depth, questions from the bidders are answered, we hold public conversations and hold meetings with proposers to help them improve some aspects of their proposals.
Our experience and commitment during STIP
During Arbitrum’s first Short Term Incentive Program (STIP), SEEDLatam Gov formed a multidisciplinary team responsible for deeply evaluating the grant proposals.
For the purpose of analyzing the 106 submissions, we developed several essential criteria to determine which initiatives to support:
- Protocol metrics in relation to the requested grant.
- Innovation inherent to the protocol.
- Potential impact of the proposal and acquisition of new users.
- Reputation of the applying team.
- Ability to attract liquidity.
- Impact on the Latin American ecosystem, in line with our vision and mission to support the region
You can check here all the feedback we’ve given to the submitters and also the rationale behind our decisions.
We have also shared a spreadsheet detailing the analysis we conducted on each submission, along with the reasons for approving or rejecting their funding request.
Last but not least, we held a series of governance calls to give the opportunity to the projects to introduce themselves and answer all the questions the community had in order to better understand their proposals.
In the end, we decided to support 32 proposals out of the 106 initial ones.
Our highly positive experience in the previous STIP, where we developed the technique from scratch to collaborate and analyze protocols, positions us as a unique team capable of adding significant value. It’s important to note that all this work was carried out without the expectation of additional compensation. Providing our team with resources will greatly enhance their capabilities and the resulting outcomes.
What do you think a good incentive application looks like?
As with the opportunity to evaluate the STIP submissions, in this case, we believe that the bare minimum that projects must communicate is:
- Protocol metrics in relation to the requested grant.
- Innovation inherent to the protocol.
- Potential impact of the proposal and acquisition of new users.
- Reputation of the applying team.
- Ability to attract liquidity.
We should note that in this opportunity the geographical impact of the protocol won’t be taken into consideration. We aim for the whole Arbitrum ecosystem to grow.
We also agree and will encourage and collaborate with submitters to also fulfill all the outlined eligibility criteria:
Additionally, we will encourage protocols to disclose the following items in order to allow the Council take the best decision:
- Time Since Deployment.
- History of Exploits or Hacks: Disclose if the project has experienced any security breaches or exploits.
- Importance of the Protocol in Its Niche: Assess how the protocol stands out in its specific niche.
- Number of Similar Protocols on the Chain: Analyze the saturation of the blockchain with similar protocols.
- Composability with Other Protocols Also Applying: Look into how the protocol can integrate or work in synergy with other protocols seeking grants.
- Comparison with Similar Protocols Participating in the Grant: Compare the protocol with other similar projects in the grant program. Consider factors like innovation, performance, community support, and potential impact. This comparative analysis can help in understanding the protocol’s relative merit.
- Impact if Previously Granted Funding: If the project has received funding before, evaluate the outcomes of that investment.
What are your goals for this program?
Our objectives for the proposal remain aligned with the STIPs: To experiment and search for the most efficient way to attract protocols, users, and TVL to Arbitrum.
We believe this is a great opportunity to assemble a strong team alongside other members of the Arbitrum ecosystem to develop frameworks that will serve as a long-term foundation for the DAO to allocate resources effectively. Additionally, we are in the stage of gathering extensive data on which forms of incentives work and which do not, in order to refine these types of proposals in the future.
We are still executing the STIP funds distribution, so the final data about its effectiveness will arrive in a couple of months. Both STIP and LTIP will be a great source of information for future incentives rounds.