Why don't we decentralize development and funding?

why don’t we decentralize development and funding? monero has a community based funding approach.


i find it very interesting that they all work for XMR. if we can decentralize development, it creates a community. the current block rewards looks like a federal tax and then it becomes centralized development with gatekeepers and in fighting over rewards money. let the community fund it not only zec holders.

1 Like

I like the idea but I don’t think it should be the only option. Some things need continuity, like node development. The poster example is the shielded ZEC Ledger support which AFAIK Ledger isn’t accepting as long as there isn’t a company behind it committed to support it.


the middle ground would be 1) core development where 80-90% of block rewards goes to developers and 2) all community projects are funded by the community and 3) all small projects funded by the community. 4) marketing funded by the community.

the monero crowdsourcing approach to decenteikzed community based funding would be a great step in the right direction and away from the current structure that looks more like the centralized governmental control we are seeking to avoid.

we need more development; especially for what
i believe is critical development for privacy based digital money (stablecoins). once stablecoins become established, zec really starts to become marginalized if we don’t have a full spectrum of products.

so blockrewards should be more aligned with critical and important improvements to the blockchain (especially opening it up for more decentralization) and broadening the spectrum of privacy based products. community funding for everything else.

It seems that you are more specifically interested in two new funding systems that have not been yet used by Zcash, but have shown success in other ecosystems:

ZEC-based Kickstarter - submit ideas, pledge ZEC, if milestone reached, funding is sent to project
You can google “commong pitfalls of kickstarter” to understand the pros and cons of this approach. Sometimes matching is involved.

ZEC-based Retroactive Funding - submit past work, users pledge ZEC, funding is sent to projects based on pledged amounts. Sometimes with additional math and matching involved to entice community members to vote.

definitely both are interesting tools for us to have on the funding toolbelt!

1 Like