P.S. As he is ‘in the news’ in this voting round, through no fault of his own, I wanted to mention Connaugh’s grant activity.
@Connaugh was funded through both ZCG and CDRGP, but for separate scopes of the same overall activity.
His CDRGP application came first and sought retroactive payment for work already completed (USD 22,000). He then applied to ZCG for USD 60,000 to produce a further 24 videos, explicitly disclosing the CDRGP application and stating that no film would be funded twice.
Interestingly, ZCG actually approved its grant first, on 14th September, while the CDRGP vote was still to come. The coinholder grant for the earlier work was approved afterwards in the Q3 binding vote on 29th September.
This is a neat example of plural governance in practice. Two ways in. Different funding mechanisms can do different jobs, and legitimacy does not have to come from just one place.
The work rewarded by CDRGP had already been completed at his own risk. ZCG separately decided to fund future work. Neither mechanism needed to be the sole gatekeeper.