For fairness to small independent contributors within the Jupiverse DAO,
(1) IDEA - A:
I want to suggest an idea of splitting any DAO future Bounties/Grants (or similar including those by Working Groups) into 2 categories:
1. Group 1 (Big Creators / Hosts & First-Class Talents)
2. Group 2 (Small Creators / Hosts & Third-Class Talents)
1. Group 1 (Big Creators / Hosts & First-Class Talents)
This group 1 contribution can be judged by the grants/bounties teams with a main focus on content production quality and reach as usual.
The current DAO/WG teams are more obsessed with content production quality and huge engagement as criteria to affirm content quality (which are not the same - I defined them below for clarity) and that is not helping the smaller creators feel fairly appreciated for their contributions within Jupiverse.
NON- Content Aspect:
It is the same for non-content-based things like events, if you gather 15-25+ people you don’t get the team’s attention and support but if it is 100-1,000+ that’s when it is considered worth supporting.
While it is good that we host events with a huge number of attendees, I have no issues with that. We should also start paying attention to smaller gatherings, it sometimes could be more effective, as fewer attendees means more interaction that can lead to long-lasting onboarding and active participation within the DAO.
My take is to let the team support both small and large events and not enforce or pay attention only to events with huge attendees)!
2. Group 2 (Small Creators / Hosts & Third-class Talents)
This group 2 contribution can be judged by the grants/bounties teams with less focus on content production quality and reach but on content quality and unique style to the creator.
Even though smaller creators might not have huge engagements on their content, they still pour their heart and effort into creating it with the resources they have (or can afford).
The same goes for hosts that have not built the capacity to host events with huge attendees, third-class independent talents building tools, websites, and dApps helping in their own little way within the Jupiverse.
NOTE:
Content Quality is how helpful is the message/solution the content provides.
WHILE
Content Production Quality is the quality that goes into conveying the content quality like the quality of the camera, microphone (audio), visuals (B-rolls, transcription, translation etc.) and editing.
This should be differentiated to reward contributors fairly.
This is currently not the case within Jupiverse DAO because those in charge seem to focus more on content production quality and huge engagement mainly and once your content gets less engagement means it has no content quality - No, it shouldn’t be so!
For example,
The $100,000 Catstanbul Contest could be divided into $50,000/$50,000 for both groups 1 and 2.
Rewards may look like:
-
Big Creator (10-25 Winners):
$2,000 - $5,000 each based on their content production quality and reach -
Small Creators (50-100 Winners):
$500 - $1,000 each based on content quality and the uniqueness of each creator’s style (without comparison to content production quality and huge engagement of big creators in group 1).
The Catstanbul bounty if followed the above method will still be able to achieve its goal of 60 winners they announced.
Because the above method will still end up with 60-125 Winners with less community discontentment as we saw with the current method the Uplinks WG used for the bounty.
We need more transparency in what the DAO team and WG do,
its not too much to ask as it will foster a healthy relationship between the team and the community and reduce FUDs where everyone both big and small contributors feel appreciated and well rewarded for their level of contribution and not placed against unrealistic standards.
(2) IDEA - B:
Lastly:
Bounties like that though it can be listed on Superteam for the team to easily check the submission and select winners. There should still be an official post on JupResearch where every participant Big/small creators MUST also share links to their content for the community to see (the community aren’t choosing the winners, the bounty team still does that - just for transparency and aligning community with the fairness of the process and reduce fuds that usually follows such winners announcement).
So, if anyone feels too big to be accountable to the DAO community by submitting their content link as a reply to the post, then they are not qualified to get the DAO’s grants/bounty no matter how influencer they are.
The Jupiverse DAO grants/bounty should be for the community and not to please first-class influencers who actually don’t care about the actual Jupiverse DAO community’s survival.
tistic Love To You All!