A Flexible Design for Funding Public Goods

1 Like

I really do not understand how this solves the free-rider problem, regardless of them stating the system does so. It looks more like a mechanism to efficiently allocate funds (originating from altruistic sources), among competing projects.


Anybody have firsthand experience with Gitcoin grants?


In short, matching funds get distributed to a long tail of projects.

The projects are not necessarily competing.

My main issue is that it is mostly a popularity contest.


There was a (one-off?) FundOSS experiment that the Gitcoin folks ran. Problem was lack of options, I think, not the system itself.

I agree with @boris that the projects aren’t compelling. There’s a bit of a cold start problem.

Given how difficult it is to get things working using ETH (and getting ETH in the first place), I find what gitcoin has accomplished impressive. There are a lot of people donating to a lot of projects.


Gitcoin and the social movement around it has been the most powerful aspect.

The ecosystem as a whole has a high level of awareness around open source and concepts surrounding public goods.

EG “you are a Project which is making lots of money, where is the evidence that you are either producing public goods and/or supporting their production over time”