Community Structure/Support [Funding Proposal 1]

(Summary) This proposal allocates budget to the Marketing Workstream, Marley | Shapeshift, Giantkin, and Hunt.

(Abstract) + (Specification) The purpose of this proposal is to fund three special projects as well as a workstream; this includes the funding of:

Marley | Shapeshift - 3,500 USD in FOX, funding the use of OBS + Cloud. This provides the DAO with an ability to provide professional quality content across a range of platforms, including but not limited to youtube, vimeo, twitch, and I am currently subscribed to a 75 USD a month premium subscription to Vimeo and believe this budget to be, if anything minimal – and does not compensate those setting up infrastructure for their time. This budget is allocated simply to create a system that functions efficiently for those responsible for operation in the future.

Marketing and Growth workstream – Funding the marketing and growth workstream with funds (10,000 USD in FOX) to use in collaboration with me (Hunt) on various community driven projects (including but not limited to content creation, giveaways, and tipcc fox fund allocation for workstream leader/contributors to disburse).

Giantkin – 200 USD in FOX to use for Discord/telegram premium plugin/bot/add-ons. Currently there are a number of options/solutions being explored on our community platforms, specifically Discord at this current point of time. As Giantkin finds solutions for the community (calendar, anti-spam/raid, ticket systems to help operations, support systems) I believe that it would be beneficial to explore premium features. Some of these features have monthly costs associated (1-10 USD a month, or carry lifetime-use options for purchase/licensing).

Hunt – Allocation of 1,500 USD in FOX - Since becoming involved in community structure/support activities within the DAO, I have had numerous strategies/plans in development. Some of these ideas include educational content from community members (graymachine is an example of this theory providing fruitful benefit), and spontaneous compensation for community contributions (youtube/ streaming, article content, graphics). There are underlying community building activities that I can and plan on engaging in as a community support/growth focused contributor. I have used personal funds to-date, and can say that this figure proposed is reasonable if funds are used in an efficient manner.

(Motivation) Giantkin has continued to go above and beyond in his contribution to the DAO – Dedicating both his time and energy to the community to the tune of 14-16 hours a day 7 days a week. For this reason, I am proposing that he be provided with a 1500 USD bonus upon successful completion of the 4-month term currently defined in the ‘cmod’ project proposal. This will provide not only adequate compensation, but more importantly motivation for Giantkin to continue serving the community in the future.

A reference to the job description of ‘head-cmods’ from the previous ‘cmod’ proposal:

“Community moderators support and enable healthy community growth. These individuals are responsible for tasks associated with supporting, informing, and protecting the FOX community from bad actors (including but not limited to scammers and malicious users). Two ‘Cmods’ are identified as being immediately needed by the community according to tasks and work necessary within a number of ‘Fox Dens’ (the communities that we inhabit such as discord, telegram, forum, boardroom, reddit). These ‘Cmods’ are needed to address the lacking community support structure within the discord, telegram, forum, and boardroom. While further coverage must necessarily occur across other community engagement venues (reddit, and the like). Community projects, activities, and other engagement-points will be focused on by the ‘Cmod’ team alongside marketing & growth workstream contributors. Beyond that, a support system will be established for discord in order to address relevant community problems/concerns”.

To further promote community infrastructure and growth, I am proposing an allocation of 10,000 USD in FOX tokens to the marketing and growth workstream. The workstream leader will work in collaboration with me, and others involved in any associated ‘bounty’ compensation related to task/project execution. The current community focused marketing and growth projects being developed include but are not limited to educational content created by community members (bounty compensation), a content creators contest, community driven streaming/interviews, and article/content distribution campaigns (bounty compensation) on Publish0x, as well as through paid press release distribution networks. Beyond allocation of 10,000 USD in FOX tokens to be controlled by marketing and growth – 1,500 USD in FOX tokens are proposed to be distributed to me (Hunt) in order to fund community building efforts. These efforts include but not limited to tipping community members for value added, contests, events, and giveaways. I have personally spent that amount (in USD value) and would like to continue providing community building efforts in the ways that I already am, and plan to continue via participation incentivization.

Finally, Marley | Shapeshift needs funding to setup infrastructure to record and distribute content, as well as create a system that enables workstream leaders to hold live events with lesser restriction that currently experienced. I have been personally recording meetings, and it alone is a full-time job (with 5+ meetings a week, the human capital used becomes overwhelming for one individual who has other responsibilities). This infrastructure will provide alleviation for the individual(s) responsible for recording/distributing DAO meeting/event video content.

Fund disbursement:

Upon passing: Marketing and growth immediately receives 10k USD in FOX, Giantkin 200 USD in FOX, Marley 3500 USD in FOX, Hunt 1500 USD in FOX. Once Giantkin and Hunt complete the 4 month ‘cmod’ term currently in progress; 3000 USD in FOX will be split evenly and distributed to each individual. Each transaction listed in this budget proposal will be completed using Colony, and will take place according to the defined timeline:

Month 1: 15,200 USD Allocated in FOX Tokens
Month 2: 0 USD Allocated in FOX Tokens
Month 3-4: 1,500 USD Allocated in FOX Tokens
Total: 16,700 USD Allocated in FOX Tokens


This budget proposal is aimed at community growth/infrastructure development. In order to continue to provide and further develop amenities and activities associated with the Shapeshift DAO – Funding is required. This budget would provide Video Content production and distribution solutions. Further this proposed budget would provide marketing with funds in collaboration with community marketing efforts by me (Hunt). Next Giantkin will be enabled to operate in the most capable and efficient manner when testing, implementing, and adjusting bots/addons/plugins for Discord.


This budget proposal costs the FOX community 16,700 USD, with an intent to solve numerous problems, while compensating the problem solvers. The cost/benefit of this proposal can be questioned in terms of value added to the community being lesser than the cost. I do not believe that to be a concern, however this is a plausible point of concern for any voter analyzing the budget and goals/proposed-outcome associated with each project.


For - The Marketing and Growth Workstream, Giantkin, Hunt, and Marleys special projects.

Against - The Marketing and Growth Workstream, Giantkin, Hunt, and Marleys special projects.


I’ll say this - one of the things about blockchain technology that first excited me was instant payments with a verifiable transaction ledger. Payroll, taxes - it doesn’t matter who was getting paid, the idea that instant payment could occur and in the ways that it could occur and be audited was exciting.

I honestly think whoever is recognized for and/or is being voted in to perform some kind of work on the DAOs behalf should recieve fair pay for a days work. It’s very noble that anyone would work for free or for some extended period of time without compensation - there’s that saying - if you’re doing something you love you won’t work a day in your life, but reality is that fair compensation should be an expectation.

I happen to be pro-artificial intelligence for customer service and sales, but not everyone wants to talk to a Ai bot or even be screened by one, but that aspect of my personal concern isn’t reflected here.

What does the current Shapeshit marketing budget look like: salaries + benefits + expenses?


Thank you for taking the time to respond to this @goodfaith – I agree with you on every point you made to the T. The idea that community contributors will work out of passion is likely going to be an ongoing reality – however that can’t be a standard moving forward. I know for a fact that those already involved in the DAO from the ‘community-side’ are extremely passionate about the mission and product goals that are already in place/forming.

Support and operations are going to be taking a major task on as the DAO expands, and operation/support capacity changes (I believe there is an assumed volume of work that is lesser than what will actually have to be taken on/maintained).

Regarding the marketing salaries/bene./expenses I’m going to link to a couple posts/resources related to that, of which I’m sure you’ve seen some of already:

I would like to add, that my reason for budgeting marketing with that 10k - Is to be used in projects not already defined by the proposal/plans that are involved with the budget, and structure in the workstream proposals (for marketing). Further, as a voter, I would like to see a separation of power in cross-workstream workflow situations where there isn’t just one set of eyes controlling something as important as brand/lead-growth focused marketing campaigns/efforts.


I actually had not seen that. I’ve been reading white papers, documentation and learning a tech that is somewhat new to me. I don’t have a strong overview of what workstreams are making proposals, getting funded, ect…

It’s something that should be transparent though a DAO.

1 Like

Absolutely agree with you. There are some people that can chime in for me that will tell you I am pushing that narrative harder than anyone else :slight_smile: The community has to feel a sense of inclusion isn’t synthetic.


What’s funny about it, is that I even think a smaller teams makes better decisions - especially when having more insight and/or better information regarding the result of an action taken by the organization. Consensus on that action should be democratic through. One of the first things I suggested was to be burn some or all of the tokens not claimed in the airdrop, charging fees and buying tokens on the open market and burning a portion of those. I can now understand why that proposal isn’t so hot with the “corporate” Shapeshift.

I actually like some of the revenue generating efforts the DAO (previous corporate) has. ie. setting up validators, partnership programs…

The value accrual for those activities could be significant, plus that sets up a way to have fox users steak tokens to the validators fox operates, but I also think they should provide options to steak to other validators though the Ui.

But ya overall, I think transparency about who owns/controls a portion of the DAO tokens is important as well. I guess you could say that is a big part of the “Tokenomics.”

1 Like

I would be happy to support a budget proposal to fund this workstream for some of the resources described, these all sound like good uses of funds to in terms of the purposes for community marketing efforts, bot support, and of course allocation for making sure we have a good streaming setup for various community meetings.

I don’t know enough about the streaming to weigh in on of this is the right solution or not, but I assume that research is being done and I hope other community members will weigh in if they have any knowledge on the subject.

I do like how the marketing funds are tied into the marketing workstream so that it builds in some natural oversight and alignment around those use of funds from multiple teams working together, I think that is a cool aspect of this I would like to see with some other proposals as things evolve.

I do want to say one thing about the bonuses as described in this doc, in general I don’t think the DAO should get in the habit for bonusing people already paid for a workstream for just doing their job well, the hope should be they are fairly compensated and the DAO expects them to do their job well (otherwise they would be replaced). If people think they deserve more comp, they are always welcome to ask that of the community though, either through a one time bonus as described here or by asking for their comp to be adjusted when funding is renewed for a workstream. That being said I think in this case, this is a small amount being asked for and both @giantkin and @huntthewick have really been going above and beyond in their efforts for the community so I don’t mind voting for it this time around, but in the future I hope this does not become common place with workstreams.

Overall all of this funding request makes good general sense to me and I think they are very reasonable asks, I support voting for this but also would love to hear community feedback from others as always.


In general I think the governance process is designed around trying to force this exact transparency and so far I feel like it has been doing a good job of that.

The various stages (from forum → boardroom ideation → snapshot) build in time and try to make sure anyone who is interested has time to see governance process in action and give feedback at any of the various stages along the way. It can be hard to keep up with all the various aspects going on as the DAO gets more active (which is great in many ways) and im sure all of the community shares this goal of transparency so always good to hear feedback on how we can increase that and make sure as much of the community as possible has a chance to weigh in on things.

I’m not aware of any proposals gaining support that have not followed the governance process that do allow anyone to weigh in, as well as all of the major proposals so far being talked about in multiple various community meetings. So right now the transparency part is going pretty well, but we could definitely finds ways increase the signal level of these important proposals various ways to encourage even more of the community to weigh in on a regular basis as things move forward hopefully.


I agree 100% with the bonus addition to a project. It would be irregular for this to happen in most project/proposal instances. As workstream leaders are allocated funds to distribute in ‘bounty’ form - I haven’t had an ability to utilize reserve funds. This is the case mostly, due to the responsibilities taken on by me as being ever-expanding to date. Unfortunately that means that I’ve asked @giantkin to be involved in side projects that I have willingly volunteered my time to. For this reason, I believe he has gone above and beyond his ‘agreed-to’ terms from the CMod proposal and I would hope to be able to compensate him accordingly.

Thanks for bringing that variable up jon.


Keep track of these initiatives on a Kanban Board, or spreadsheet, from initial discussion in the forum → boardroom ideation → snapshot, and track the delivery and/or effectiveness of the proposal, and prominently display it.

Give links so that those who are interested in a topic know where to go to have a voice or provide insights that could enlighten others about their expertise.

I know there’s that UIA repository, or whatever it was called, that is supposed to organize all the data into one place - perhaps that type of organization is what takes place there. I like automating as many functions as I can, so finding ways to do that and creating policies to track that info as seamlessly as possible would be a priority out of the gate.


Those are some great suggestions, would love to see a community run spreadsheet of all proposals and their current stages/links that anyone can reference to keep track of. That would be super useful!


Reading through all the comments here. From everything I’ve been witness to so far, you and Giantkin would both put these funds to excellent use. I have no doubt it would a worthwhile allocation of FOX and you deserve the compensation for your efforts. You’ll have my vote as this proposal stands. :100::fox_face:


Looks good to me. As we move forward, do you maybe want to set a goal of handing the meeting recording / posting to Vimeo off to someone in the community? Once you establish the software & process, maybe you can free yourself up for other tasks.


The Information workstream, if established, would gladly take on the role. What kind of research have you done regarding FOSS alternatives for the recording of these meetings? AFAIK, there are plenty of automated software that can be deployed on servers for this exact purpose. I don’t think it’s right that you pay out of pocket for Vimeo, although a great tool, I do agree you should either be compensated or there should be a deeper look into opensource alternatives.

Re: the funding for smaller community initiatives, I’m all for it. No community, no growth.


Hey @lpx - Thank you for the great question. To address the video/compilation/distribution and the ‘controller’ of that - We have had and often will have numerous meetings a week, with events, ama’s, community organized meetings (and whatever else the DAO wants to record). I think that it would be critical that there be numerous people involved. Currently with Vimeo, I have 10 ‘admin/contributor’ spots open to contribute/admin on the backend. 5 community members (beard, pete, marley, willy and myself) have access to those controls/features currently and are spending their free-time looking at the various capabilities that we currently have at our disposal.

To be completely clear, I have not even tried to automate this on my own as I have people that want to give me input as that is done (there are some really smart guys/gals at shapeshift). Marley and I have discussed ways to do that (cloud solutions + obs = vimeo + obs) - there are of course many ways to get this done, however my concern is the human capital used in each video creation. At the current time, you have to record on a hardline on a standalone device as you also participate in the meetings (that’s my current way to get this done without spending a week dialing in automation and more money). Here is our goal however: Have a system in place that makes it easy for workstream leaders to jump on there and get what they want recorded, distributed (to multiple hosting platforms; youtube, theta, twitch) and further to get the content posted to a variety of connected social accounts in a few clicks. This alone will cut time used for each video by hours.

Related to open source: YESYESYES. I am using opensource options when ever possible. The DAO calendar found on our discord is an example of opensource being the answer. I’m not 100% sure on opensource being the answer here - but I’d love to explore that idea.

For now, I’m spending at least two hours to simply upload a one hour meeting (before vimeo premium it took 3-4 hours per 1 hour video). To me that’s unacceptable, and I know Marley got burnt out very quickly recording the first few meetings (before I took over). I believe Marley, myself, beard, willy, and whoever else wants to contribute to finding the right solution for the DAO will find the right answers as long as we are financially capable.


I am largely in favor of this proposal, but I do think that these funds may be light even, as we are in the early phases of the DAO and as we continue to grow, I expect these costs to continue to rise. I would recommend a scaling month over month budget approach with expected growth each month and built in cost increases and allocations to match. The work being done today will be shy in comparison to the work being done in 4 months when the DAO has grown immensely. (or so we all hope :slight_smile: )

I would like to see this eventually get rolled up into the Marketing Stream and have this handled through there so the community outreach is consolidated and can be tagged along with the larger stream budgets.


I support this in general. Isn’t @PeteCoin the proposed leader of Marketing and Growth workstream? If so, I would like to hear his opinion here. Particularly the funds going through that workstream, which seems like the right place to me at first blush.

The amounts all sound reasonable. I don’t have direct experience with any of the suggestions, and trust that @huntthewick has done the research. Like @jonisjon said, if anyone else has more info about this and has any arguments against, I’d be curious to hear that. Not because I don’t trust @huntthewick, but because I think disagreement and debate are healthy.

I think @huntthewick and @giantkin have been doing great for us, so support the one time bonus, though in general I agree with @jonisjon and would like to not develop a habit around it.


Hey @Josh Thank you for adding to the debate/drafting process on this budget proposal. I realize now that I need to include language related to the funds that are being allocated to @PeteCoin. I do not necessarily believe those funds need to (all) be used in any given time-frame. I think that it would be best like you said for @PeteCoin to have a hand in any marketing activities in order to maintain standards (brand, message, deployment). If funds are not used in the term that I am granted by the DAO to contribute - I think said funds should of course stay within the control of Marketing and Growth for future community driven growth efforts/campaigns.

1 Like

Thanks. I realize you are not allocating funds to @PeteCoin, but rather to the Growth and Marketing workstream. As a likely soon to be workstream leader, as well as overall vested governance token holder, I’m curious about this process where someone proposes funding through a workstream, and what the involvement of the workstream leader is in that, if at all.

1 Like