ZOMG meeting minutes 8-31-2021

Hey Zcash Zeal! :zebra: :zebra:

Here are this weeks meeting minutes and as @zecretary and others have requested, here is the spreadsheet of ZOMG current holdings/grants/commitments that ZF updates for us:

Also, I want to amend my comment the other day. Per this meeting I redact my previous statement about no other current members of ZOMG running for re-election. Chris and Holmes have confirmed they are not running. Hudson and Michelle have not confirmed if they will be running.

Beyond this correction I won’t comment further to the status of other ZOMG members decisions. I apologize for any confusion.

Minutes are below:

ZOMG Google Meet Meeting: August 31, 2021
[Minutes taken by Danika]
Meeting minutes:


Hudson Jameson
Chris Burniske
Holmes Wilson
Alex Bornstein acting as ZF resource

Danika Delano acting as notetaker


  • Opening Conversation

The committee congratulated Hudson on his new role at Flashbots. Hudson and Chris described what Flashbots do.

  • ZF Updates

Alex brought up the public Dashboard that Dodger shared and explained that the goal is to share it publicly. He asked if anyone wanted any changes to it and if they would want it to be shared in the meeting minutes. All members were fine with it being shared in the minutes and did not have any requested edits.

Alex told the committee that they are wrapping up hiring for the Ecosystems Relations role and will send ZOMG an update of the full plan when ZF has news; the plan is to have a rapid start date.
Alex passed on that Jack asks that they provide public feedback to his plan for ZOMG that he posted on the forums (for those that are willing and haven’t already).
Alex reminded them to vote in the ZCAP poll if they hadn’t yet.
Alex brought up that the Trezor grantees have not been KYCed or requested a payout and have not been responsive. Shawn explained that the Trezor team were surprised that their grant was approved so quickly and thay are not ready to start till September or October. Shawn volunteered to follow up with them.

  • Zcash Thorchain Bridge

Chris asked if they were still in a holding pattern. Holmes replied that they announced that they completed Block Explorer. Shawn said that his understanding is that they were wrapping up the Block Explorer one; Hanh was helping out and found a couple bugs and it is going well; if they are ready they should follow up with ZOMG.
Holmes sent a quick note to Aditya at Nighthawk during the meeting. Shawn summarized that they need to ping them to see if their team is available for thier Thorchain grant to be reconsidered.
Chris commented that he would like to see one of the two open grants from Nighthawk complete before opening another.
Holmes updated the members that Aditya replied saying that he will be posting an update soon.
Chris brought up that there is commentary if this should be a bounty and is sympathetic to that. Shawn said that if they can get through Block Explorer, then they can vote on Thorchain again.

  • Moeda.casa + Zincretik : Peer-to-Peer trades over Dark Pools

Hudson told the committee that they created a thread since the last meeting and reading through it, he’s iffy about it; the most recent comment someone said is that it goes against AML on Brazilian and ZOMG should not give money to anyone that is skirting around regulations.
Chris said that they don’t have any volume; it has an overcomplicated implementation and when it’s overcomplicated, it’s typically not used. He acknowledged that he is aware of the language difference and, even though it’s ⅕ the price of Thorchain, it is less valuable because he’s not sure it will get used.
Shawn remarked that it is targeting a too specific demographic and it’s an overly complicated process to get there so he’s not sold on it.
Hudson said he’s okay saying no.
Holmes agreed and added that they are not able to evaluate given the clarity of the proposal so he’s okay to say no; he’s not sure the complexity leads to value.
Hudson volunteered to respond.

  • Shielded Dialogues

Holmes reminded the committee that the last discussion was about distribution strategy- if they hit 20K views, they would fund so if they edited the proposal with quarterly milestones, ZOMG should be good to approve. Hudson agreed that that’s how he remembers it.
Chris said that he looked into the institute and they look good and he thinks they would get quality content; he doesn’t like funding more marketing but he doesn’t have a strong reason to say no.
Holmes brought up that he’s worried there’s a way to work the system to get the views up and not have it be impactful; the bar is low for making an impact on awareness; having a proposal that’s in a workflow that makes high quality interviews in this space is a good thing. Hudson added that he’s okay with this goal and if they game it they game it and there’s no way to know. Holmes suggested they have a subjective milestone stick i.e. say if it’s not of value to the community, then it didn’t meet the milestone.
Hudson replied that he doesn’t think they need to have more clauses and is conscious of the milestone reviewer’s time and doesn’t want anyone to have to watch multiple episodes before they have the resources. Alex assured ZOMG that ZF will commit significant resources to support ZOMG so they shouldn’t let the lack of that current resources stop them; some grants take a lot of work and resources and one piece of thought is who else needs to be involved. For instance, a lot of people have to be involved in the mini-documentary series grant and it’s our job to do that. Hudson agreed that that is a valid consideration and they think about the same thing with technical grants. Holmes told Alex that it’s okay for ZF to say we don’t have the time and resources to review; it will be fine because they can use public resources. Alex assured ZOMG that he will speak up if it’s impossible, given ZF’s resources; doing a quality review of the podcast shouldn’t be a problem.
The committee discussed which proposal was the most current version.
Holmes volunteered to respond and to sort out which is the most current proposal.

  • ECC Acceleration using GPU Compute on Mobile devices

Chris reminded them that they wanted ECC to weigh in. Alex informed them that ZF will weigh in in the next few days; there was internal discussion tonight about getting a ZF engineer to respond ASAP.
Holmes said he didn’t understand the valence of Daira’s comment on the forum; they should make a post and kick it back to Hanh. Shawn agreed that they should give it more time to marinate because it involves diverse people.
Holmes pointed out that there’s good discussion on the thread and he volunteered to post.

  • A stablecoin for the Zcash Community

Chris said he looked at the ICHI website and the idea is to collateralize with ZEC and RenZEC so that it produces a stablecoin that is partially collateralized; he thinks they would deliver, but he doesn’t know if it would get used; he pointed out that both this and Thorchain are the same price; he doesn’t know enough about team, they do fine online, but it’s not vapor.
Shawn commented that it’s too soon; If there are ZSAs he’d like a group to create a native stablecoin on Zcash; this is a more convoluted way and they have to incorporate ETH fees. He also asked how much it will be used and what value will the average user find. Chris added that it would place a demand on renZEC.
Hudson agreed that it’s too soon because of ZSAs. A lot relies on community governance on ETH and he can’t see the Zcash community rising up on ETH; at best it would work but not provide that much value.
All members agreed to decline.
Holmes added that it brings less value than RenZEC and Thorchain, the real prize is to have dai or something like that and to send on the zcash network.
Chris volunteered to respond.

  • ZOMG elections

Holmes told the members if there’s anything they can do to invite quality candidates, especially women and folks not from the US, then they should do that (including him).
Hudson said that he’s still on the fence but he might run again; he’ll decide in the next week. Holmes replied that he’s glad to hear that as it’s good to have continuity. Shawn confessed that he may have misspoken on the forums; he was under the impression that everyone else was not running again and he posted to that effect on the forums. Hudson assured him that he was not mistaken, he just changed his mind to reconsider. Shawn replied that he will amend anyway because ML is, quote “not running again if the current structure doesn’t change” and he should let everyone speak for themselves. Shawn explained that he commented that it is very very likely he will be running again and he made a mistake to comment that everyone else is not running, which may have prompted Zooko’s alarm post. He requested that members who are still on the fence make that known on the forums.

  • New/amendments to ZIP1014 discussion

Chris asked for open discussion about what they think is a good idea, structurally, to introduce a new ZIP; he has put forward that there is a 4x time commitment and there should be 4x pay and a way for ZOMG to approve themselves as resources; other useful things are: Not all members should go up for reelection at the same time because it’s a vacuum you start from so they should offset things i.e. one set for 18 mo and one set for 12, followed by 12 or 18 mo. terms so they are offset by 6 months so there is an election every 6 months. The only downside is election fatigue. Hudson suggested he look into the ZF board election as they have a good system. Alex replied that staggered terms is a fundamental good-governance tool but takes a little more administration.
Chris continued that the other amendment should be the ability for ZOMG to vote to get rid of a disruptive ZOMG member if all members vote to get rid of them. He said this is the most controversial change and he’s not tied to this but it takes one really disruptive character to ruin a committee; it’s a type of safety but thinks some could hate it. Holmes asked what they would do if that happened to them. Some commented that they would likely have a parallel meeting without the disruptive character.
Hudson asked if Chris could write down the list in priority of importance and so the rest of ZOMG could cross out what they don’t agree with. He also suggested that he clarify that the extra resources should come from ZOMG resources.
Hudson proposed that the amendment go into effect in a year. Chris replied that becoming more independent and having more treasury management is more of a long term plan but these things are short term; there’s no way to operate independently as it is currently structured.
Holmes said he is okay with all of the amendments except the vote out because the workaround is fine; they should rely on some wisdom of the crowd and they could elect someone for a good reason that presents an unpopular view and they could be voted out.
Chris pointed out that a vote on these terms has to be a contingent type of vote and it’s important how it is presented; should be a binding vote through helios. Chris said that he thinks it should be run alongside the ZOMG candidates vote.
Alex recommended that they be very clear on how they define resources (ZF vs ZOMG funds, can it be used for hiring?, etc.).
Chris said he is okay trimming it back to pay its own ZOMG members; the question of how to create a bounty came up. Holmes suggested he keep it in there because it’s unpredictable when ZF has resources to help with the grant-flow; the ZF person could go on leave; they should set things up where independence could be contemplated; even if ZF is providing resources now, if ZOMG sees the need now, they should add it to the ZIP language so future ZOMGs could have the choice.
Chris brainstormed creating a cap for ZOMG member compensation; not to exceed annual compensation of ($250K?) for ZOMG members. Hudson commented that if money balloons, then ZOMG would need more people and it’s not going to look good to have a ZF dedicated person and a compensation cap. Chris replied that he can drop the cap. Hudson said they can put language like “reasonable amounts” that holds people accountable. Chris said he will drop the cap because it’s too adversary.


Thanks for this clarification and for sharing the ZOMG Public Dashboard. It’s pretty interesting to see the current liabilities compared to current and future assets and the risk of a lower ZEC valuation vs how much we could fund and how soon. It’s good to know that these risks are being considered and accounted for when considering grant funding.

1 Like

@Souptacular :heart:

I just want to say after participating in the ZOMG call this week that I appreciate everything that the current ZOMG committee has done for Zcash to establish this function. I’ll be sad to see @cburniske and @holmesworcester go and disappointed to not see @ml_sudo @Souptacular run again if they choose not to. You will all be missed.


Just to clarify - assuming no structural changes are made, I will not be running. There are ongoing discussions on the forum regarding these potential structural changes (time, compensation, support, etc).


@ml_sudo - Have you read what I posted to Chris’s topic regarding what the Foundation is doing to address the issues Chris raised?

I have. It was news to me. I / we appreciate the extra help - thank you.

I don’t think it solves all our major problems, though. It would also have been healthy/helpful for us to have been involved in the selection process, if not as decision-makers, then at least as contributors to the dialogue when you decide on who would spend a significant amount of time supporting us.

Thanks, Jack.


Just wanted to say that in the short time we’ve been learning about it, we’ve really apprecaited how much transparency there is from ZOMG! Even the meeting minutes are thorough! And the open public calls and video recordings have been really helpful too. Its been great to be able to see/hear your detailed & thoughtful discussions :slight_smile: