I heard the same feedback from someone who took the Zechub survey. The person said that he wanted to mark ECC as both the best and the worst performer at the same time.
maybe it would be great to have some timeframe like 1 or 2 previous year impact. cause the impact can be different every year i think.
3 Likes
Agreed. That’s why in my survey I narrow it down to the last 6 months.
Some people have been in the community since the beginning, and some joined a few months ago. Without a timeframe in the question, they will end up evaluating completely different time periods.
Employee performance reviews are usually done on a quarterly basis, so I kept it to a recent time period.
1 Like
ZURE’s closed survey went out to about 200 people. 65 responded.
Here are the results: Zcash Dev Fund & Leadership Survey Results
Some of the questions from the survey:
- Q8: Rate your support for the Direct Funding model (0-low, 5-high)
- Q9: Rate your support for the Non-Direct Funding model (0-low, 5-high)
- Q10: Rate your support for letting the Dev Fund expire and permanently allocating 100% of mining rewards to miners
- Q11: Rate your confidence in Electric Coin Company’s leadership (0-low, 5-high)
- Q12: Rate your confidence in Zcash Foundation’s leadership (0-low, 5-high)
- Q13: Rate your confidence in ZCG’s ability to allocate community funds to projects that increase user adoption (0-low, 5-high)
I will post separate reports for ZCAP members’ and Dev Fund recipients’/beneficiaries’ responses shortly. The numbers are slightly different for those groups.
The public version of this survey is still running. I’ll give it a few more days, so there’s still time to speak up.
6 Likes
The results of Zcash Ad Hoc Caucus (ZAC) poll are now available. There were 58 participants in total. You can view the results here: Zcash Ad Hoc Caucus Poll (June 2024). I’ve also included the results below. Thank you to @paulbrigner for administering the poll, and thank you to everyone who participated!
Question #1: Which of the following statements best reflects your opinion?
- The Dev Fund should be renewed after the next halving in late 2024. [47]
- The Dev Fund should end, and 100% of the block reward should go to miners. [11]
Question #2: If the Dev Fund is renewed, it:
- Should remain 20% of the block reward [36]
- Should be less than 20% of the block reward [14]
- Should be more than 20% of the block reward [7]
Question #3: If the Dev Fund is renewed, how long should it last for before having to be renewed again?
- 1 year [17]
- 2 years [32]
- 3 years [2]
- 4 years [5]
Question #4: Which Dev Fund model do you support most?
- A direct funding model where a portion of the block rewards goes directly to organizations (e.g. ECC, ZF, ZCG) similar to the current version of the Dev Fund. [10]
- A non-direct funding model like or similar to the Zcash Funding Bloc, where, for example, funds locked in a multi-signature wallet are allocated by trusted community participants through major and minor grants. [37]
- An alternative model or option not listed above. [2]
- The Dev Fund should not be renewed. [9]
Question #5: Do you support extending the current Dev Fund for one year to give the community more time to explore and implement a non-direct funding model, like the Zcash Funding Bloc? See link to draft ZIP below.
- Yes [36]
- No [21]
Question #6: If the current direct Dev Fund model is renewed, would you support more independent entities (in addition to the existing three) receiving a slice of the Dev Fund even if that means giving less % to the existing recipients?
- Yes [44]
- No [14]
Question #7: Which Dev Fund recipient has had the MOST positive impact on the Zcash ecosystem?
- Electric Coin Company [34]
- Zcash Foundation [9]
- Zcash Community Grants [13]
Question #8: Which Dev Fund recipient has had the LEAST positive impact on the Zcash ecosystem?
- Electric Coin Company [7]
- Zcash Foundation [20]
- Zcash Community Grants [23]
Question #9: Zcash Community Grants is a committee under the Zcash Foundation, and not a separate organization. Would you support Zcash Community Grants becoming a fully-independent entity capable of managing its own operations and organizational structure?
- Yes [45]
- No [13]
Question #10: The Zcash Trademark Agreement is a bilateral agreement between ECC and ZF that ultimately determines what is called “Zcash”. Among other things, the Agreement requires both entities to sign off on any network upgrade before it can be implemented. In addition, neither party is permitted to take actions that violate “the clear consensus of the Zcash community.” Earlier this year, ECC announced its intention to terminate the Agreement. If ECC unilaterally terminates the Agreement without concession from ZF, then ZF will gain sole ownership of the trademark. Which of the following statements best reflects your opinion on the trademark?
- The Zcash Foundation should maintain unilateral control over the trademark, including governing network upgrades, soliciting community sentiment through ZCAP and other methods. [4]
- The trademark should be limited to addressing violations of misuse and abuse only, and should not be used to govern network upgrades. [30]
- The Trademark Agreement should be completely invalidated. [22]
1 Like
If you wanted to compare how voters assess the entities ability to increase user adoption you should have asked about ECC’s and ZF’s ability to increase user adoption too. You only asked about user adoption in the ZCG question. Please don’t present results about leadership alongside a result about user adoption in a way that suggests they should be compared.
1 Like
The fact that someone on ZCG doesn’t realize that these questions are related is concerning. Confidence in companies starts with their leadership. Confidence in an organization like ZCG starts with its ability to spend community funds well. Well=resulting in user adoption. If driving adoption is not the top priority for a ZCG member, they shouldn’t be on ZCG.
That is my position. Others are free to disagree.
2 Likes
If I put it on a different page, will the number get better?
As a ZCG member over the past ~12 months we approved 18 grants. I voted in favor of each of these grants because I believed they would deliver value to both current and future users of Zcash. By consistently focusing on enhancing the value proposition for our users, I believe we can significantly improve our chances of increasing user adoption and fostering a thriving Zcash ecosystem.
I’m saddened that you were unable to accept constructive criticism and decided to dismiss my concerns and attack me instead. My response was not insinuating the ZCG result would have been better or worse with any change in wording I was merely suggesting that change a single word in a poll question can achieve different results, but in this case there were 11 new words in Q13 that didn’t exist in Q11 and Q12. I’m sorry if I came across harshly or wasn’t clear. To clarify, yes all I was suggesting was it should be on a different page since it’s a different question.
3 Likes
Not attacking. Simply disagreeing, and stating what is obvious to me. ZCG’s views (not necessarily your views) on user adoption is a whole separate topic.
This page is about confidence in the three organizations. People are free to interpret that data. Imho, you’re focused on the wrong problem.
to clarify, this^ part wasn’t directed at you.
3 Likes
The results of Engineering Community poll are now available. There were 20 participants in total. You can view the results here: Zcash Dev Fund Poll - Ecosystem Engineers (June 2024). I’ve also included the results below. Thank you to everyone who participated!
Please note that in this version, the questions asking respondents to rank each Dev Fund recipient as having the most and least positive impact were replaced with questions that independently assessed their performance.
Question #1: Which of the following statements best reflects your opinion?
- The Dev Fund should be renewed after the next halving in late 2024. [19]
- The Dev Fund should end, and 100% of the block reward should go to miners. [1]
Question #2: If the Dev Fund is renewed, it:
- Should remain 20% of the block reward [15]
- Should be less than 20% of the block reward [2]
- Should be more than 20% of the block reward [3]
Question #3: If the Dev Fund is renewed, how long should it last for before having to be renewed again?
- 1 year [5]
- 2 years [10]
- 3 years [0]
- 4 years [5]
Question #4: Which Dev Fund model do you support most?
- A direct funding model where a portion of the block rewards goes directly to organizations (e.g. ECC, ZF, ZCG) similar to the current version of the Dev Fund. [9]
- A non-direct funding model like or similar to the Zcash Funding Bloc, where, for example, funds locked in a multi-signature wallet are allocated by trusted community participants through major and minor grants. [10]
- An alternative model or option not listed above. [0]
- The Dev Fund should not be renewed. [1]
Question #5: Do you support extending the current Dev Fund for one year to give the community more time to explore and implement a non-direct funding model, like the Zcash Funding Bloc? See link to draft ZIP below.
- Yes [14]
- No [6]
Question #6: If the current direct Dev Fund model is renewed, would you support more independent entities (in addition to the existing three) receiving a slice of the Dev Fund even if that means giving less % to the existing recipients?
- Yes [15]
- No [4]
Question #7: Overall, how would you rate the Electric Coin Company’s performance as a Dev Fund recipient?
- Excellent [2]
- Good [10]
- Average [4]
- Below Average [4]
- Poor [0]
Question #8: Overall, how would you rate the Zcash Foundation’s performance as a Dev Fund recipient?
- Excellent [3]
- Good [12]
- Average [2]
- Below Average [2]
- Poor [1]
Question #9: Overall, how would you rate the Zcash Community Grants’ performance as a Dev Fund recipient?
- Excellent [2]
- Good [12]
- Average [4]
- Below Average [1]
- Poor [1]
Question #10: Zcash Community Grants is a committee under the Zcash Foundation, and not a separate organization. Would you support Zcash Community Grants becoming a fully-independent entity capable of managing its own operations and organizational structure?
- Yes [12]
- No [8]
Question #11: The Zcash Trademark Agreement is a bilateral agreement between ECC and ZF that ultimately determines what is called “Zcash”. Among other things, the Agreement requires both entities to sign off on any network upgrade before it can be implemented. In addition, neither party is permitted to take actions that violate “the clear consensus of the Zcash community.” Earlier this year, ECC announced its intention to terminate the Agreement. If ECC unilaterally terminates the Agreement without concession from ZF, then ZF will gain sole ownership of the trademark. Which of the following statements best reflects your opinion on the trademark?
- The Zcash Foundation should maintain unilateral control over the trademark, including governing network upgrades, soliciting community sentiment through ZCAP and other methods. [5]
- The trademark should be limited to addressing violations of misuse and abuse only, and should not be used to govern network upgrades. [11]
- The Trademark Agreement should be completely invalidated. [4]
3 Likes
4 Likes
Out of 65 respondents who filled out ZURE’s Dev Fund survey, 34 were ZCAP members. You can see that report here and compare it to the main ZURE survey report.
The public Dev Fund survey is still running and can be filled out here.
Here are some of the highlights from the ZCAP respondents report:
3 Likes
I’ve added the results from the Ecosystem Engineers and Zcash Ad Hoc Caucus polls to my spreadsheet.
Something that really jumps out at me here is that there is overwhelming support (84% across the ZecHub, Russian, Spanish, Brazilian and Engineering sub-communities; 76% within the Zcash Ad Hoc Caucus) for “more independent entities (in addition to the existing three) receiving a slice of the Dev Fund”, in the event that the current direct Dev Fund model is renewed.
Yet, in the recent ZCAP poll, only the three existing recipients received >50% approval to receive funding from a new Dev Fund.
I’m interesting in hearing others’ thoughts on why there’s this mismatch, and how best to resolve it.
2 Likes
The results could be interpreted to mean that although 84% support the idea of including more independent entities as Dev Fund recipients, there’s limited support for the specific new entities presented as options. The ZCAP question allowed respondents to approve as many options as they liked and reflected around 65%-70% support for the existing recipients, but none of the new potential recipients reached the 50% approval threshold. This may indicate that while the community is open to more independent entities in theory, the majority does not believe that FPF, Qedit, or ZecHub should be Dev Fund recipients at this time.
One might argue that these findings are further supported by Question #5 in the Alternative Poll, which asks if respondents would support extending the current Dev Fund for one year to allow more time to explore and implement a non-direct funding model. An overwhelming 71% of members from the various sub-communities support the one-year extension for ECC, ZF, and ZCG, which is consistent with the overall results of the ZCAP poll.
I should note that this interpretation does not reflect my personal view on the Dev Fund. I have been openly supportive of both Qedit and ZecHub as potential Dev Fund recipients if the direct-funding model is renewed.
5 Likes
18 posts were merged into an existing topic: Dev Fund 2024: Community Poll & Discussion Megathread
Posting Zcash Dev Fund & Leadership Survey, Final Report. This report combines responses from two surveys: a) private survey, which went out to about 200 contacts and got 65 responses, and b) public survey, which was available on social platforms and got 47 responses.
Here are some slides from the report:
3 Likes
Out of the 112 respondents who filled out ZURE private and public surveys, 48 were ZCAP members. A separate final report for that segment is available here.
Here are some of the highlights from the report:
3 Likes
The results of the ZecHub poll are now available. There were 15 participants in total. You can view the results here: Zcash Dev Fund Proposals (ZecHub) I’ve also included the results below. Thank you to everyone who participated!
Question #1: In a Non-Direct Funding Model, funds are locked in a multi-signature wallet and allocated by trusted community participants through major and minor grants. Individual entities’ wallet addresses are removed from the protocol, and a percentage of block rewards go into the multi-sig wallet. This grants-based model requires those seeking funding to contribute to Zcash to submit proposals and compete for funding. State your support for a Dev Fund that uses a Non-Direct Funding Model.
- Strongly Approve [11]
- Approve [3]
- Neutral [1]
- Disapprove [0]
- Strongly Disapprove [0]
Question #2: A Direct Funding Model, similar to the current Dev Fund, allocates block rewards directly to specific entities or organizations, embedding their wallet addresses into the protocol for a specified period of time. State your support for a Dev Fund that uses a Direct Funding Model.
- Strongly Approve [0]
- Approve [3]
- Neutral [2]
- Disapprove [3]
- Strongly Disapprove [7]
Question #3: The Dev Fund should end and 100% of the block reward should go to miners.
- Strongly Approve [2]
- Approve [0]
- Neutral [2]
- Disapprove [2]
- Strongly Disapprove [9]
Question #4: Manufacturing Consent (Draft noamchom67-manufacturing-consent: Manufacturing Consent; Re-Establishing a Dev Fund for ECC, ZF, ZCG, Qedit, FPF, and ZecHub): This Dev Fund would last for four years and consist of 15% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 5% for the Zcash Foundation, 4% for Bootstrap Project (parent of ECC) for the first year only, 4% for Zcash Community Grants, 2% for Qedit. Following the first year, when ECC will no longer receive their 4% allocation, those block subsidies will be distributed as 1% to ZCG, 1% to ZecHub, 1% to the Financial Privacy Foundation (FPF), and 1% to ZF.
- Strongly Approve [4]
- Approve [1]
- Neutral [1]
- Disapprove [2]
- Strongly Disapprove [7]
Question #5: Lockbox For Decentralized Grants Allocation (50% Perpetual Option) (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would allocate 50% of the block rewards to a lockbox in perpetuity designated for future decentralized grants funding.
- Strongly Approve [0]
- Approve [0]
- Neutral [4]
- Disapprove [3]
- Strongly Disapprove [8]
Question #6: Establishing a Hybrid Dev Fund for ZF, ZCG and a Dev Fund Reserve (Draft zf-community-dev-fund-2-proposal: Establishing a Hybrid Dev Fund for ZF, ZCG and a Dev Fund Reserve): This Dev Fund would last for two years and consist of 20% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 6.4% for ZF, 8% for ZCG, and 5.6% for a Dev Fund reserve that is stored in a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding.
- Strongly Approve [1]
- Approve [3]
- Neutral [2]
- Disapprove [4]
- Strongly Disapprove [5]
Question #7: Hybrid Deferred Dev Fund: Transitioning to a Non-Direct Funding Model (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for one year and consist of 20% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 12% to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding and 8% to Zcash Community Grants.
- Strongly Approve [5]
- Approve [3]
- Neutral [5]
- Disapprove [0]
- Strongly Disapprove [2]
Question #8: Lockbox For Decentralized Grants Allocation (20% Option) (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for two years and allocate 20% of the block rewards to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding.
- Strongly Approve [6]
- Approve [3]
- Neutral [4]
- Disapprove [2]
- Strongly Disapprove [0]
Question #9: Masters of the Universe? (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for four years and allocate a 25% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 17% to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding and 8% to Zcash Community Grants.
- Strongly Approve [2]
- Approve [1]
- Neutral [4]
- Disapprove [3]
- Strongly Disapprove [5]
2 Likes
The results of the Zcash Espanol poll are now available. There were 15 participants in total. You can view the results here: Zcash Dev Fund Proposals (Zcash Espanol). I’ve also included the results below. Thank you to everyone who participated!
Question #1: In a Non-Direct Funding Model, funds are locked in a multi-signature wallet and allocated by trusted community participants through major and minor grants. Individual entities’ wallet addresses are removed from the protocol, and a percentage of block rewards go into the multi-sig wallet. This grants-based model requires those seeking funding to contribute to Zcash to submit proposals and compete for funding. State your support for a Dev Fund that uses a Non-Direct Funding Model.
- Strongly Approve [7]
- Approve [5]
- Neutral [2]
- Disapprove [1]
- Strongly Disapprove [0]
Question #2: A Direct Funding Model, similar to the current Dev Fund, allocates block rewards directly to specific entities or organizations, embedding their wallet addresses into the protocol for a specified period of time. State your support for a Dev Fund that uses a Direct Funding Model.
- Strongly Approve [1]
- Approve [5]
- Neutral [3]
- Disapprove [1]
- Strongly Disapprove [5]
Question #3: The Dev Fund should end and 100% of the block reward should go to miners.
- Strongly Approve [2]
- Approve [1]
- Neutral [3]
- Disapprove [5]
- Strongly Disapprove [4]
Question #4: Manufacturing Consent (Draft noamchom67-manufacturing-consent: Manufacturing Consent; Re-Establishing a Dev Fund for ECC, ZF, ZCG, Qedit, FPF, and ZecHub): This Dev Fund would last for four years and consist of 15% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 5% for the Zcash Foundation, 4% for Bootstrap Project (parent of ECC) for the first year only, 4% for Zcash Community Grants, 2% for Qedit. Following the first year, when ECC will no longer receive their 4% allocation, those block subsidies will be distributed as 1% to ZCG, 1% to ZecHub, 1% to the Financial Privacy Foundation (FPF), and 1% to ZF.
- Strongly Approve [0]
- Approve [6]
- Neutral [5]
- Disapprove [1]
- Strongly Disapprove [3]
Question #5: Lockbox For Decentralized Grants Allocation (50% Perpetual Option) (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would allocate 50% of the block rewards to a lockbox in perpetuity designated for future decentralized grants funding.
- Strongly Approve [1]
- Approve [6]
- Neutral [3]
- Disapprove [1]
- Strongly Disapprove [4]
Question #6: Establishing a Hybrid Dev Fund for ZF, ZCG and a Dev Fund Reserve (Draft zf-community-dev-fund-2-proposal: Establishing a Hybrid Dev Fund for ZF, ZCG and a Dev Fund Reserve): This Dev Fund would last for two years and consist of 20% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 6.4% for ZF, 8% for ZCG, and 5.6% for a Dev Fund reserve that is stored in a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding.
- Strongly Approve [1]
- Approve [5]
- Neutral [3]
- Disapprove [2]
- Strongly Disapprove [4]
Question #7: Hybrid Deferred Dev Fund: Transitioning to a Non-Direct Funding Model (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for one year and consist of 20% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 12% to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding and 8% to Zcash Community Grants.
- Strongly Approve [3]
- Approve [6]
- Neutral [3]
- Disapprove [0]
- Strongly Disapprove [3]
Question #8: Lockbox For Decentralized Grants Allocation (20% Option) (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for two years and allocate 20% of the block rewards to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding.
- Strongly Approve [4]
- Approve [5]
- Neutral [4]
- Disapprove [0]
- Strongly Disapprove [2]
Question #9: Masters of the Universe? (Draft nuttycom-funding-allocation: Block Reward Allocation for Non-Direct Development Funding): This Dev Fund would last for four years and allocate a 25% of the block rewards in the following allocation: 17% to a lockbox designated for future decentralized grants funding and 8% to Zcash Community Grants.
- Strongly Approve [1]
- Approve [3]
- Neutral [7]
- Disapprove [0]
- Strongly Disapprove [4]
1 Like