2016, I was holding ETH on Poloniex when the DAO hack happened, and watched Zcash begin trading on the same exchange. Since then, I have contributed to a 21M max supply, autonomous DAOs, governance, and community building because I have always believed that autonomous projects could change the world: communities governing and sustaining their own work, no printer, without a central boss or big dependencies, self-made individuals creating their own role, and rebuilding trust in one another. It may sound utopian, but I am still here.
My own experience has made one thing clear to me: autonomy requires transparency and self-management. Today’s discussions across Zcash reinforce the need for clear information, impartial reporting, and progress that anyone can verify.
Grow first, then organize. That inspired the name OpenZcash: making Zcash’s activity, decisions, and progress easier for everyone to follow.
Note: A community experiment, only valid for ZCG.
This is a community experiment to help shape the scope, deliverables, and proposed budget before submitting a grant application. A project can have multiple scopes and multiple sizes and can be defined by community sentiment pool, thus aligned with what Zcash really needs at the moment and what it doesn’t.
The aim is to clarify expectations, identify agreement and disagreement, and reduce repeated negotiation. ZCG has 100% autonomy and decision-making authority.
I’m the first guinea pig
People using OpenZcash have shared feedback, requested improvements, and encouraged me to seek funding to sustain the work.
For OpenZcash’s first public budget consultation, I want to seek community consensus on the scope and amount before anything else, and whether that’s worth it.
What already exists
OpenZcash brings together grants, payments, governance, projects, development, wallets, and communities. It includes a public API, copilots, and the Monthly, Operations, and Sources & Data publications. FPF has linked the platform in its Coinholder review resources.
All amounts below cover 6 months:
Which annual amount and scope should I submit? - (Is there a way for me not to see who voted? Is that possible?)
- A: $36,000: maintenance and publications, with a paid assistant - A team of two
- B: $54,000: A + a basic shared back office - A team of two
- C: $72,000: B + milestone tracking, exports, and community sessions - A team of two
- D: I do not support this.
- E: Maybe less than (A).
- F: Maybe more than (A, B, or C).
- G: I need more information before deciding.
What 6 months would deliver
- A: $36,000: maintain the existing platform, API, and copilots; publish 12 sets of Monthly + Operations + Sources & Data within current coverage; preserve evidence and corrections; report costs and progress quarterly.
- B: $54,000: everything in A, plus a basic shared back office for sourced team updates and correction requests, with review history. Prototype by month 6, usable release by month 12; pilot targeting two volunteer teams.
- C: $72,000: everything in B, plus milestone-to-evidence tracking, CSV exports, an operating guide, and two open community sessions with public summaries. Complete by month 12.
The poll will run for 7 days.
What would you keep, change, or remove? If you use OpenZcash, which part is useful to you?