Hi,
Thanks for the grant application. Sorry, but we must push back on this grant, highlighting the following:
- The grant is not submitted in accordance with the template prescribed by which Grants DAO has mandate.
- Grants DAO is currently on a mandate renewal (CIP is in voting), to which the outcome of this vote isn’t known for another few days, which conflicts with the start date of this requested grant.
- There does seem to be some need to accommodate these style of grants (whereby there’s a pool of funds and then these are distributed). But, the grantee needs to agree to the Terms and Conditions of the grant - and we want to avoid problems that we have had before where solvers expected payment on different chains etc. This is why we have terms and conditions.
So, moving forward, I would suggest:
- Adjust the grant request to be in accordance with the template. We can then allocate budget if the application passes approval from the Grants Committee…
- For the solver to claim, they must agree to the terms and conditions as well - there needs to be some thought as to how this is communicated.
- Payment amounts and specification is to be denominated in xDAI (payment on Gnosis Chain). Additionally, why can we not allocate some $COW to this instead of depleting only the xDAI budget?
- The grant should establish a clear mechanism by which it can be verified that respective solvers have achieved said targets (what data source has provenance etc).
For general overview, the grants application process may be reviewed here: Applying to the Grants Program | CoW Protocol Documentation (including links to the application template).
mfw78