Hey Zcash Zeal!
This week was our first meeting with the newest ZOMG member @ml_sudo ! 
Hudson, Holmes and I met ML via video on Saturday to bring her up to speed with how ZOMG has been operating, COI policies, etc… and ML was gracious enough to accommodate our normally scheduled ZOMG meeting time even though it was extremely early in the morning her time zone. We also agreed to a new meeting time for future ZOMG meetings to accommodate schedules.
This week we also reached out to Aditya from ZecWallet and invited him to our meeting so we could better understand his perspective of the recent application regarding funding ZecWallet.
As usual, fantastic minutes by @Danika are provided:
+ZOMG Zoom Meeting: February 3, 2021
[Minutes taken by Danika]
Meeting minutes:
Attendance:
Hudson Jameson
ML Sudo
Shawn
Chris Burniske
Holmes Wilson
Aditiya from ZecWallet (guest)
Danika Delano acting as notetaker
Pre-meeting Agenda:
Welcome ML
Grants platform approval process (arbiter assignment)
Review of ZcashZeal proposal
Review of renZEC swap proposal
Aditya scheduled call in at 12:00
Notes:
-
Welcome ML
All members formally welcomed ML to ZOMG -
Grant Platform Approval Process
The members discussed the internal process of assigning an arbiter once a grant is approved. Holmes was worried that the process will confuse people and Shawn suggested that one person approves and assigns arbiter on all grants and the ZOMG volunteer for the specific grant responds on the forum. Shawn volunteered to be the one that manages the grant platform back-end functions after each approved proposal. All agreed to switch to this system. -
Zcash Zeal Proposal
Chris asked if people know the applicant outside of the application. Shawn said they seemed enthusiastic on the livestream. Hudson thought they sounded like they would do a competent job
ML pointed out that there isn’t a section in the application for concisely describing what applicants want to do (across proposals). Chris & ML agreed that it would be beneficial to have a section with the prompt, “in one paragraph, what do you want to do?” Hudson volunteered to ask Grants.io. to change the “Motivation & Overview section to just “Motivation.” Chris suggested adding a new section that says “in 3 paragraphs or less what are you trying to create?” ML asked if ZOMG has a sample and Shawn pointed her to the applicant landing page
Hudson thought the Zcash Zeal proposal was well done in that the info is well curated he thinks podcasts are powerful.
Chris shared that $25K for 2 years is cheap and reiterated to the group that they should be ready for the majority of proposals to be marketing. He stated that he is supportive of community grown content over the long term. Holmes voiced that he is supportive of the grant but he wants more specifics to the proposal. He implied that they might be better sticking to video/audio if they have more experience with that. Hudson stated that he would like to approve then follow up with questions and thought it would be restrictive if ZOMG holds them back from funding. Chris thought the group should respond saying they are leaning favorably toward the proposal and they are in a position to approve but they want to know exactly what the applicant is going to produce.
ML suggested adding a quality filter saying that if they have biweekly posts they want to make sure they are quality content, which she admitted is subjective. Chris put out the idea that they could reserve the right to pull funding if the quality slips. Holmes pointed out that the purpose of milestones is to ensure quality. Hudson suggested asking for more details and requesting that they add milestone and KPI metrics (that ZOMG can help with) and explaining to the recipient that there are quality standards and they are setting the bar. Shawn proposed they could approve for 6 month and if that is good, fund on a rolling basis with ZOMG doing due diligence to review. Holmes suggested funding for 3 or 4 months which would make quarterly milestones. Chris voiced that creating four things by the end of April feels tight. ML asked if the grant amount was suspiciously low. Holmes restated that it may be better for them to concentrate on one platform like podcasts rather than spreading thin. Hudson said he liked the idea of funding for 6 months so they had time to launch and see the impact. Shawn agreed with funding for 6 months. Holmes told the group that his personal experience with milestones is that they were helpful to give his project structure. ML stated that there will need to be a fixed structure beyond the 6 months or the 1st payout. Chris suggested giving $3,000 (and change) upfront then $3,000 (and change) in 3 months. He summarized the group’s sentiments that they want a podcast and website and a newsletter would be fine but not as important as the other two. The committee agreed that re-evaluation is motivational. Hudson agreed and suggested saying they are happy funding for a year in that they will fund 3 months now and reevaluate in 3 months. ML recommended giving a token amount to start, then another sum when they launch, then another sum 3 months after that. Shawn volunteers to respond to the applicant. -
Aditya from ZecWallet (guest)
Shawn explained to the committee that he reached out to Aditya with a view to understand what the application process was like, what his questions are, what the difficulties were, and how ZOMG can improve this process in the future. -
Aditya thanked ZOMG for the opportunity to join the meeting and share his perspective. Aditya gave an overview of Zecwallet and its history. He explained that the project was funded over a year ago by the Foundation to improve decentralization and spoke to some of the questions asked on the forum. He shared that the last 2 ½ years he has been working on it part time as the only developer so there are some constraints. He emphasized that it is not in a finished state and he is in the process of becoming a company and making it into a more robust wallet (which was inspired by conversations with the Foundation).
Holmes asked for feedback as an applicant and suggestions for what ZOMG could do better. Aditya said that it was not clear what ZOMG wants (what principles). He was not sure what to write in the grant and if ZOMG’s model was project based or is open to funding companies (and see what they deliver). He also shared he was not clear why he should accept ZOMG funding over the Foundation’s. He disclosed that the contract he had with the Foundation stated that the Foundation can revoke funding at any time for any (or no reason). Aditya explained that if he needed to justify every decision (to ZOMG), it would be too much work.
Hudson explained that they are in the process of figuring out what ZOMG should be because the ZIP did not give much direction. He replied to Aditya’s questions by saying that they make decisions case by case so it is hard to write out what ZOMG wants because it is case dependent. Chris added that ZOMG is creating processes as they go and ZOMG’s priority is to fund important projects. Hudson gave some background to the response on the forum by disclosing that he asked about infrastructure costs because he didn’t have context of what goes into it.
Hudson asked what communication channels could have improved understanding. Aditya replied that the phone or video would have been optimal. He thought it was fair for ZOMG to ask questions but they need a way to ingest the answers because they are very complex and take a lot of time to explain all the details. Everyone agreed that a call would be better to follow up on questions that have complex answers. Holmes replied that if applicants think the questions are hard, he wants them to feel free to respond asking clarifying questions. ML added that even though the community knows and trusts Aditya, they want to treat everyone the same.
Hudson asked if it was unclear that ZOMG was going to fund him. Aditya replied that he did not think he would be funded in the current state. He thought would have to do a re-architecture to get accepted and it would be a lot of work. Hudson told Aditya the response to his proposal was more about how ZOMG can be supportive and learn more about costs. Hudson told Aditya if he wants to reapply, they can have better communication. Holmes added that they do their best to make their assessment consistent and fair while also being open minded. He shared that ZOMG can work towards his direction as long as they understand it. -
Renzec Proposal
Chris stated that getting more shielded Zec into DeFi is really important engineering work. Hudson explained that they have to use unshielded to get to ETH. ML asked if there are other alternatives. Hudson said the applicant is the go-to for wrapped assets and to wrap Zcash. Holmes shared that he thought ECC had worked with them to get them to add Zcash. Hudson suggested they put their response on hold until next time. Holmes requested that everyone try it out before the next meeting and to ask ECC for a reference. Chris said he wanted to make sure it is clear to the applicant that they are favorable but they just need more time. ML stated that she is more supportive than her initial impression and agreed that they should try it out. Holmes volunteered to respond.
Additional items
ML told the committee she wants there to be a lot more clarity to the community and suggested stating it in words on their website and ensuring they are aligned with the Foundation and ECC on a big picture level/a grand purpose).
Shawn spoke to Aditya’s question earlier by explaining the Foundation was probably not going to fund as many grants because they have a smaller portion of the Dev fund. Applicants should work with ZOMG because the Foundation is expecting ZOMG to do a bigger portion of the funding since they have a bigger slice of the Dev fund. -
Summary of action items:
Reach out to Grant .io to edit application format (Holmes)
Respond to Zcash Zeal proposal (Shawn to respond)
Respond to Renzec proposal (Holmes to respond)
Try out Unstoppable wallet (all)
Ask ECC for a reference of Horizontal Systems (Holmes?)