Proposal to Backfund Successful STIP Proposals (Savvy DAO) [FINAL]

First of all, MUX delegates sincerely appreciate all the DAO members who pushed for the productive yet intense STIP program, and we also respect all the efforts that went into this backfund proposal. After internal debates and long discussions, we have decided to vote “Abstain” for this proposal.

Although MUX delegates totally support the idea of having more protocols and builders to be supported, backfunding doesn’t seem to be the most reasonable approach:

  1. The 25+ proposals in this backfund bundle have mixed quality; some are worthy of support, while some are questionable, considering the protocol fundamentals, incentives execution strategies, and actual grant requested.
  2. It would be more reasonable to have the proposals being voted on individually in a round 2 type of event instead of binding all the proposals together.
  3. The term “inclusion” was used frequently in this conversation to back up the intention. However, it seems the phrase has been used to dodge the fact that the original grant size was set according to supply & demand + DAO treasury fund management concerns instead of being “exclusive”.
  4. Round 1 was made possible by DAO members advocating for a framework so more protocols and builders who are building projects with solid fundamentals and clear benefits to the ecosystem can be supported. Some of the claims that tried to twist the original intention in this forum thread are a bit sickening to see.
  5. Passing the quorum wasn’t a solid reason to back up the claim for a “guaranteed” grant; Passing the quorum + making it to the cutoff line was, given the fact that the VOTED size for the first STIP was 50M.
  6. We hope the backfund attempt won’t become a recurring behavior that will always happen after all STIP types of events :slight_smile:

To conclude, although MUX delegates would love to support many individual proposals included in this bundle, the delegates can’t seem to all align with the backfund approach and reasonings behind this proposal. Therefore, MUX delegates will vote “Abstain.”

Additional Disclaimer:
Previously MUX delegates didn’t have a chance to participate in the backfund proposal AMA hosted by @SavvyDeFi due to time conflicts, but we listened to the full recording.