Blast Incentives to DAOs formation - Systematizing the Ecosystem Structure

The idea here is to stimulate the formation of daos whose missions are important to the ecosystem through a method of incentivize them to submit projects that could be funded if approved. The idea is produce multiple centers of inventive to many important web3 areas, like:

  • Art
  • Games
  • Metaverse
  • Education
  • Development (Dev)
  • Finance
  • Law

We could think about other areas, but it is important that we have a group of general DAOs, in order not to multiply without need. It is common to use a rule that no DAO should be created if there is already one with that mission.

I believe this could be structured in this way:

  1. The DAO is formed and a post presenting the DAO is written in the forum. The presentation should show us the DAO’s mission, the people involved with their curricula of real person, the projects the DAO intends to do in the short and long term, which will be their evaulation criteria for success/failure of the project, how the dao is structured in its application, expelling, voting etc, and which are the socials and historic of the DAO.
  2. The presentation is debated between blast holders at the forum, and the DAO can fix its presentation according to the ideas suggested by the community. A DAO presentation is not something that anyone can reject because a DAO is only presenting itself, but it is a good idea to follow the holders suggestions, given the result of the submission asking for funds will depend on the community somehow (it could be through voting, through veto, or any way we think is good).
  3. After having a satisfatory presentation, a DAO is invited to submit a project, asking for funds. The project must contain the objective, the actions, what is intended to achieve, and how all of this is helping to grow blast ecosystem. Of course, we have to establish a time frame and a budget. All projects must be justified in terms of what it brings of value to Blast Foundation and ecosystem.
  4. After approval of the project, the DAO has its timeframe to develop it and finish it. At each period (a month maybe), the DAO should present a partial report or a final report at the forum. And this report should be evaluated by selected people to do this.
  5. The report must say what was achieved, how this benefits Blast Foundation and holders, and how the project can improved in a next round. If the report is approved, the DAO is entitled to another round of funding. If the report is not approved, the DAO is not entitled to another round of funding.

(Maybe blast holders with a certain amount of blast could be the ones who vote on the proposals, given they have more skin on the game concerning the value of blast tokens, but this is something to discuss).

Of course, the main idea is to pay people with blast tokens and stimulate them to use it for governance and other utilities.

Does this idea look good to you?

1 Like

An idea for an introduction of dao communities at the forum:

X DAO Introduction

The X DAO is going to be a guild under Blast Chain whose mission is: ____________. This mission benefits Blast ecosystem in the following way: _______.

Who We Are

We are a DAO created to _____. We are composed of the following people, with _____ role in the DAO, and their curriculum vitae:

  • Person 1: Description + CV link + Socials
  • Person 2: Description + CV link + Socials
  • Person 3: Description + CV link + Socials
  • Person 4: Description + CV link + Socials
  • Person 5: Description + CV link + Socials

Membership

People can join our dao as a member by ____, following w rules, and can join our community by reaching us here _______.

Council Members

  • Person 1
  • Person 2
  • Person 3

General members

  • Person 1
  • Person 2
  • Person 3
  • Person 4
  • Person 5

Community Group:

  • Person 1
  • Person 2 …
  • Person 20

Founding Members

  • Person 1
  • Person 2

Our DAO

(Description of the structure of the DAO, their inner groups, multisig, voting system, links etc.)

Our Goals

(Description of the DAO’s mission, its projects, and how do the projects and mission are integrated and develop Blast ecosystem.)

For Next Month we propose:

  • Project + project description

Ideas (long term - other months)

  • Project + project description
  • Project + project description
  • Project + project description

What’s Next?

(Tell what the community is going to do now. Is it going to submit a funding proposal? Or working better in their socials before it?)

If you have thoughts or questions just drop em below. The team is going to add, edit, or remove various elements of this working document before considering it ready.

A suggestion of how submitting a funding proposal

Funding Proposal for X DAO - Month, Year

(Link DAO Introduction in the forum)

Council Members

People and wallets

Target: Multisig wallet

KYC: Person who is gonna make the KYC for the DAO
(We suggest video conference as a proof of reality)

Previous report

Quote previous report with forum link
(we will suggest in comments a way of producing reports)

Total Requested Funding Amount: XX USD in BLAST TOKENS

Projects and Budgets

  • Project 1 (add project link) - xx USD in BLAST
  • Project 2 (add project link) - xx USD in BLAST
  • Marketing (add marketing project link) - xx USD in BLAST
  • Council work (add snapshot approval) - xx USD in BLAST
  • Total budget: xx USD in BLAST

Relevance and justification

The main objective of this set of projects is _____.

This is important to Blast ecosystem because _______.

Timeline

Month / Year

  • Week 1: (describe activities to fulfill the project objective)
  • Week 2: (describe activities to fulfill the project objective)
  • Week 3: (describe activities to fulfill the project objective)

Expected Metrics

  • xx new users
  • xx new active members
  • xx blockchain transactions
  • xx new mintings/listings/buyings
  • xx new token launches
  • xx new holders
  • Increase of subscribers/views/engagement on X/Instagram/Youtube etc by xx%.
  • Partnership with Y DAO to secure W or to grow xx% in criteria K.

DAO Approval of the budget proposal on snapshot: (add link)

A suggestion of how to create reports for funding proposals

X DAO Report - Month, Year

Council Members

People and wallets

Target: multisig address

Project Status: Completed / In Progress / Failure

Treasury

  • Total requested: xx USD in BLAST.
  • Total spent: xx usd in BLAST (explain in brackets why some resources were not used, in case they weren’t).
  • Total left in the DAO’s Wallet: xx in BLAST tokens

What we proposed

(Link funding proposal)

What we have accomplished
(add all project reports and links of the executed funding proposal)

  1. Project and report link for the project. Add cost of the project.
  2. Project and report link for the project. Add cost of the project.
  3. Council grant (add dao approval link and cost)

Products and Services: (Add products created and services done. This part must show how the project execution could satisfy the expected metrics) (Also add marketing information about socials)

Hiring the Community: Present which members of the Community linked to the dao were paid by the dao and to do which activities.

Updated Project Timeline: If the project is late for any reason, write the reason here, and also a way to complete the project with a new timeline.

Highlights: Talk about the execution of the project and its main achievements and difficulties.

Onboarded on BLAST: If people were onboard into BLAST, make a list with them and their wallets. If they were onboarded to the dao, present the link of the approval. If it is possible and if you have this information, present the curriculum vitae of the person or at least their socials.

Learnings: State the problems and how you dealt with them or intend to deal with them in the next time.

Next Steps: Tell us what the dao is going to do in the future. Is it keep building the same projects? Is it going to develop its projects to a next level?

Previous report: (If the DAO has a report for a previous funding proposal, send also that report in the end. It is good for evaluators to compare 2 reports.)

(This model supposedly can also be use for reports of individual projects, mutatis mutandis)

Just sharing a personal thought, I need to double check the Blast projects that have launched tokens thus far but I feel like a lot of them have some sort of governance/DAO angle with their respective tokens. I think right now we need to focus on how to attract the best builders to build on this ecosystem.

1 Like

Hi, @jenn. Thank you for answering. So let me be circular in a virtuous way. Firstly, I must say that “attracting builders” and “attracting creators” are not mutually exclusive actions. And now I get to the circle: I really believe that to attract builders, we must have a community that represents a possible set of users for the builder to decide to build within blast. A friend of mine, for example, is a developer, and he has developed a virtual cultural center (from scratch) and a web3 book publishing app that exists on polygon network. One of the main points for him to decide for polygon was the amount of users inside polygon community. So it seems developers decide to onboard a chain when there is a community of people that could be his/her users. But why users onboard a new chain? And not just any kind of users, but active users. They come to a chain that has the apps they need and also other kinds of users that users need (for example, artists need marketplaces and dexs, but also they need collectors). I am talking all of these because I believe we should not invest in developers instead of creators, given they both are important to the virtuous circle I described. Of course we can have a developer creating an art marketplace, but what would him achieve if there are no constantly active users? We should invest in both, and in an integrated way. I saw that Blast is investing in creators only indirectly by giving gold to apps that have creators as users. This is an interesting path, but I believe it does not account for the real interests of creators, which if specifically supported, can create a real ecosystem for blast, for beyond of what investors and traders can do. Because investors and traders can - and frequentely do - move from investments when it is not profitable anymore, while for creators, as they are building their own identity and portfolio on web3, it is harder to leave an ecosystem where they have established their presence.

I was thinking in something along these lines for the major structure:


In my sketches, you can see I do not consider marketing a dao, but it is important a lot, in a way that I think marketing should not be dealt by the community, but only by Blast itself, as directly choosing a good team to work with the DAOs. The idea is to have a closed system of large daos and medium daos for the ecosystem metadao (large like: researchers, developers, and creators; and medium like: games, art, investment, law, academic, and the other ones quoted here), and an open system of small daos for the specific missions inside the medium and large daos. I think a system like this could improve the link between developers and users, and also between the multiple sectors of web3 citizens, making Blast grow. If each one of the large (or large and medium) daos have 1 people in its council indicated by Blast, this would keep Blast controlling the experiment, and it would step by step be able to give each time more control to the community, with a gradual decentralization.

We can agree or disagree about which daos are large or medium, or what daos should be large or medium, but I think that the main point now is to know if we all accept a system which I call “metadao system with safety measures”: a metadao composed of large daos, which are composed of medium daos, which are composed of people. One person from each medium dao is indicated by Blast, and they manage the organization of small daos that could be created for specific missions by the community.