Community Oversight Member Elections: Meet the Candidates

Thank you very much for your questions, and your early support.
Will consider any support as merely preliminary as minds can change! But very much appreciated.

I agree. Again, will emphasize the need for updated, comprehensive, and user-friendly dashboards.
Currently, within AADAO’s primary and secondary channels (e.g., Twitter, Forum, Cosmonaut HQ/AADAO), we frequently encounter inquiries such as:

  • “How much funding did X receive?”
  • “How much funding is X seeking?”
  • “When did X apply?”
  • “What is X’s proposed scope?”
  • “What are X’s deliverables? What’s the projected delivery timeline?”

Often, due to the lack of synchronized updates on the dashboard page alongside AADAO announcements, AADAO members, find themselves directing community members to various Medium blogs, tweets, and or transparency reports. This approach is highly inefficient and the fragmentation across different channels leads to frustration. This can be remedied.

The solution lies in committing to maintaining a “single source of truth.” I propose that AADAO’s website (as the primary channel) and a corresponding Oversight Github repository serve as definitive, and mutually supportive sources of truth.

Prior to posting announcements for batch grants and transparency reports, all relevant and new information that can be captured on dashboards should be updated to reflect the latest information shared across various communication channels.

To illustrate, please refer to the layout of the current dashboard page

Create an intuitive interface that allows users from the top to navigate through different categories easily: [Applications Received], [Applications in Progress], [Accepted], [Rejected].

Clicking on [Applications Received], for instance, would direct the user to a dashboard specifically designed for displaying this category.

The Applications Received dashboard would effectively present essential information organized in columns, such as:

  • Applicant Name
  • Applicant Entity
  • Applicant’s Point of Contact (This facilitates direct communication between applicants and the community, ensuring AADAO does not become a communication bottleneck.)
  • Application Submission Date
  • Requested Funding Amount
  • Link to Application (This would be provided upon consent from the applicant to share a complete or redacted version of their application.)
  • Funding Category: e.g., Applied R&D, Interchain Public Goods, etc.
  • Status: e.g., Under Review, Interview, Approved, or Rejected.

Dashboards are just visual extensions of a datasets, and as such, the underlying data should be openly accessible.

The dataset or SQL files used for creating the dashboards should be shared in a public AADAO Oversight Github repository.

Further integrating with Github, we could link to Applicant/Grantee Github orgs and pages.

The Gitthub platform could also facilitate community engagement, allowing members to raise ‘issues’ to address concerns with rejected or approved grants or other relevant matters pre- and post-award.

For us to enhance the quality of our deliberations on funding decisions—who receives funding, for what projects, and why—having precise and readily accessible information is crucial. I also believe that organizing applicant and grantee information serves significant internal value, particularly for the Grants, Strategy, and Oversight committees.

This structured approach not only fosters transparency but also streamlines internal operations, with enhancing collective consideration in shared decision-making processes.