This style of grant is currently being done with OxArbitrage. ZF recently renewed a contract with him to continue to work on Zebra development: ZF Grants - 2 weeks zebra development
I agree with the idea of getting good people on-board that we know to get stuff done. I think some of it depends on how the developer likes to work.
For instance Ox is directly contributing to a ZF project with the ZF developers so it makes sense for the structure to be a set time/rate.
However some developers may want more flexibility to go fast and experiment on things that may or may not work, so in that situation how does the ZOMG/ZF set that developers Grant/award for work to be performed, and for what time period? What happens if they decide they need more funding midway through? If there wasn’t specific “goal” defined to begin with how do we know that more funding is needed to reach that goal?
Speaking for myself: I think there is room for ZOMG to be more flexible and not over-burdon grantees with too many requirements/ micro managing. But in my mind that needs to be balanced with some forms of accountability so at the end of the day when the community asks: “What happened to all that ZEC we gave X person?” , we have a better answer than “I don’t know”
I just ask that you please keep in mind that ZOMG is a brand new idea for funding that has never been done before, made up of 5 people who have never done this before, we are all learning what works and what doesn’t. Our award/ evaluation / grant process is evolving as we go.