Incentivized creativity contest after HOPR mainnet network launch
+++ PROCEDURE +++
after the mainnet network launch, people are invited to build whatever they want on HOPR → analytics, applications, proofs of principle etc
after an a priori defined period x, a submission window of e.g. one week opens (given the prizes outlined below, I guess x to be at least 6-8 weeks)
→ the period x is defined by the HOPR team
people submit (a) their results, so WHAT they have done, as well as (b) a documentation of HOW they have done it (public GitHub repositories etc)
the HOPR team preselects an amount of X submissions
→ important in the context of quality AND legality
→ obviously, there needs to be an initial filter concerning both aspects
DAO votes on the winners, e.g. top 5 are rewarded (balanced or weighted, I would prefer weighted)
NOTE: such a thematically unbound event requires a set of to be fulfilled conditions/rules concerning quality and legality communicated a priori by the HOPR team to make a possible submission eligible to be rewarded!
+++ BENEFITS +++
unbiased feedback loops for the HOPR team from multiple high profile individuals/groups
start of the creation of an ecosystem around HOPR
top-notch submissions provide organic marketing for HOPR
HOPR community growth
+++ BUDGET +++
obviously spitballing in the current stage, since it depends on multiple aspects of the DAO as a whole, the IF and HOW of a multi-stage hackathon etc
prizes for a post Hackathon creativity contest with the motto AMAZE US around HOPR could be organized as follows:
total sum of prizes: Y
→ the exact amount is defined by the HOPR team and needs to be harmonized with other proposals being part of DAO v.0.2
for example: Y = 62.5k DAI
five prizes are also just an example, a top 3 also seems feasible (also specified by the HOPR team)
I like your idea. I think you definitely need to spread the word. However, I think we should also maintain the existing early adopters. That is why I added this proposal that caters for both the internal crowd as well as attracting others.
I think you are more referring to the utilization of the HOPR tokens of the DAO!
I am just pointing at the DAI tokens. BENEFIT: They cannot be sold against the DAI/HOPR pool, so the price of HOPR cannot see any downside.
I would rather say that even the contrary is true midterm with an evolving ecosystem around HOPR (obviously it should push HOPR price)!
Good points. I agree with the benefits, and I was in fact talking entirely about the DAI tokens. The proposal is for the DAI tokens. So, yes to using DAI for the grants and competitions. And also yes to incentivizing hodlers and node runners. As you mentioned, the thought is to try to preserve hopr and prevent mass sale of tokens.
I like the idea but I wouldn’t let the HOPR team preselect an X amount of winners. I think it is better that the community (by likes or some sort) preselects the winner and after that the whole community can vote for the top 5. That way you don’t get the intention that the HOPR team only choose submissions they like.
Thanks a lot! :-)
I have chosen this structure due to the same reason the HOPR team has to preselect proposals in here by marking them as valid/invalid etc → if the community preselects, the initial filter is missing. Thus, the danger exists that proposals are voted which are problematic in a legal way etc.
So in principle I agree with you of course, i just don’t think that it would be executable under these conditions.
Having the chance to put a stable coin at work is highly beneficial in such a scenario!
And I see your point. However, I doubt that the team would distribute any DAI to holders etc, so they would have to sell DAI against the pool.
But, at the same time, there is already a staking program, so holders already have to chance to be rewared (I am also a holder of course). And I guess it is fair to assume that everybody who runs a node is also staking.
Yes I understand your point and I also think it is something that has to be done. My only point is that you want to make it as decentralized as possible, and therefor it’s better to let the community decide instead of the HOPR team. But you are correct about the execution, I also think it is hard to execute. I do also believe that the community wouldn’t select a proposal that isn’t legal because than the community themself would have a problem. Maybe when you vote, you can sign a sort of contract that you understand what you vote for, and when the end result is a proposal that’s problematic there will be consequences.
I agree with you, the suggested preselection by the HOPR team puts in some centralized nuance. But given the outlined scenario, there might ne no other option → already the chance of getting a legally problematic submission voted in has to be avoided. Otherwise, the HOPR team might face the situation to reject a decision of the DAO, which would be beyond bad.
Well, this is a DAO, and this is a chance to make our opinions heard. I am both a staker as well as a node runner. I am totally fine getting some of my incentives as DAI while my xHOPR and wxHOPR increase in quantity and value . I would be happier if some of that DAI is also put towards building the use cases. This two-pronged approach would ensure the token appreciates in value, and everybody is happy On a side note, incentivizing node runners and stakers can happen through multiple forms, not just through a drop of DAI. For example, it could be through diving some balancer HOPR/DAI LP tokens, or something similar with uniswap or sushiswap or honeyswap (some of this is in the hopr proposals also).
Thanks a lot!
I tried to formulate/create a scenario which will reward early token holders mid- to longterm way more (HOPR’s one and only key to success is adoption) than shortterm immediate benefits like burns, buybacks, additional distributions etc.
From some past experience of talking to hackathon organizers (although I think OP is suggesting to do a dedicated HOPR-only hackathon) we can already tell that normally hackathons charge a fee in DAI plus prize distributions in tokens such as HOPR. So these two proposals could nicely work together.
I guess joining an online hackathon such as the ones organized by the Gitcoin folks or Eth Global would help us reach even more people and spread the word more effectively. But such hackathons do charge a fee in DAI (amount varies hugely but anything that is to be distributed here is good money for a hackathon).
Of course I have already seen the proposal by the HOPR association aiming at a similar direction! :-)
I am not too familiar with the organization of hackathons, but aren’t they always rather limited in time + somehow related to a certain topic (I might be wrong here)?
In this context, my proposal could be rephrased as a temporally expanded and thematically free hackathon! ;-)
The main work order for the code-willing community out there I had/have in mind is: AMAZE US → US = HOPR association + community.
So, to address an audience as big as possible, it might be a scenario worth considering to start with joining an organized Hackathon in the first place (DAI or HOPR/DAI). Then, after an initial amount of awareness is reached, a HOPR-only (not the token) event (–> AMAZE US) could follow!