Insight Sharing - Distributed Auditability

Project Catalyst Fund 6, Insight Sharing - Distributed Auditability

Title	Project Catalyst Fund 6
Subject	Insight Sharing - Distributed Auditability

Wikimedia Commons Image

Author	Stephen Whitenstall
Published	15/08/2021
Version	1
Revision	0

Creative Commons Attribution

Introduction

The insight-sharing phase of Project Catalyst Funds allows people to share their perspectives on the challenges in a Catalyst funding round before proposals are launched. This phase allows the community to brainstorm Challenge subjects and to inspire and inform proposers.

Insight-sharing specifically asks:

• What gaps do you see in how this challenge is currently addressed?

• How can we improve the challenge brief?

• What wild thoughts do you have about how to best address this challenge?

The insights shared here all concern the auditability of Project Catalyst funded proposals. And I seek to demonstrate that auditability problems and solutions are applicable in many different challenges. Each with their own context and specific issues.

F6: Improve and Grow Auditability

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/campaign-home/26119cardano.ideascale.com

$100,000 in ada

How to make the auditing process of funded proposals efficient, distributed, and transparent?

Distributed Auditability

Description

Project Catalyst Funded Proposals have no consistent reporting of what they intend to deliver or how budgets are being spent. Reporting information is presented in a variety of formats, and this inhibits the general ADA holder/voter from easily assessing progress and quality of delivery.

1) Access to and use of fund data

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Access-to-and-use-of-fund-data/365775-48088cardano.ideascale.com

Access to how often projects get funded and the total funding amount spent is expected in the next few months (via Fund 5 “Catalyst Site: Project tracking”). But this data requires careful analysis and needs to be supplemented with specific metrics on how a funded proposal’s budget is spent and what stages have been achieved. It is also necessary to communicate the state of a funded proposal as widely as possible and in an accessible, consistent format.

2) Networks of trust and reputation

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Networks-of-trust-reputation/365777-48088cardano.ideascale.com

The de facto situation relies to a large extent on an informal network of trust and reputation. Consequently there is a significant amount of qualitative judgment, even where quantitative assessments are possible.

Such an informal network risks introducing unwarranted assessments of trust and reputation. Community assessments and ultimately the decisions of voters may rest merely on past associations. There is the danger that after a few funding rounds such an informal network begins to establish itself as a permissioned culture that draws on a permissionless chain.

3) Matching the quality approach of IOHK

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Matching-quality-approach-of-IOHK/365773-48088cardano.ideascale.com

The challenge then is to raise the bar of quality in Project Catalyst to a level of maturity that ultimately matches the quality approach of IOHK with its peer-reviewed research and evidence-based methods. So, a high level of quality assurance becomes integral to the success and reputation of a funded proposal.

4) Distributed Auditability

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Distributed-Auditability/365770-48088cardano.ideascale.com

At its heart Project Catalyst is an experiment to develop distributed governance for the Cardano blockchain. So, meeting the challenge to improve and grow auditability requires a distributed approach. An effective and equitable distribution of auditability will require connections between the funded proposer and the community to be established, the communal development of transparent audit methods and constant iteration.

Qualitative and quantitative measures

Distributed Auditability also needs to take account of both qualitative and quantitative measures of a funded proposal’s success. Whilst quantitative reporting can be largely automated, qualitative assessments require engagement between proposers and the community.

5) Auditability & Challenge Teams

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Challenge-Team-support/365574-48088cardano.ideascale.com

Description

The announcement of “Challenge Teams” at the Catalyst Town Hall of 11th August 2021 (Catalyst Fund6 Townhall #1) introduces a new dimension to this auditability challenge. This circumstance opens the possibility of funding to provide ancillary support for Challenge teams.

This audibility challenge may also inform how Challenge Teams should be structured. Such as including some input from those who supported and voted for the presentation of the challenge. This would ameliorate the risk of introducing a Challenge "closed shop".

There is massive potential in Challenge Teams leading by example. By making it desirable to demonstrate quality, by distributing knowledge and expertise.

F6: Developer ecosystem

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/campaign-home/26104cardano.ideascale.com

$1,005,000 in ada

How can we create a positive developer experience that helps the developer focus on building successful apps?

6) Auditability and the Developer ecosystem.

The treasury for this challenge has increased from $600,000 to $1,005,000 in ada.

Description

Auditability in the context of the Developer ecosystem challenge is directly related to its positive success metrics. Well-documented and tracked projects provide value to other developers in the Cardano community, reduce duplication of effort, contribute to a lively open-source culture on GitHub and provide assurance to enterprise dev managers that a project is scalable.

Support for quality assurance of Developer ecosystem proposals was demonstrated in Fund 5 when my own proposal Quality-Assurance DAO was voted for.

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Auditability-of-Developer-ecosystem/366374-48088cardano.ideascale.com

F6: Distributed decision making

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/campaign-home/26104cardano.ideascale.com

$75,000 in ada

How can we help the Catalyst community to get better at distributed decision making within the next two Catalyst rounds?

7) Communication of decision making.

Description

For people to participate in decision making there must be as few barriers as possible to entry. This implies ease of access to participation & access to clear, timely communication of the decision-making process. Those involved in decision making are responsible for its accessibility & clear communication of what is being discussed must be integral to every meeting. Otherwise, decision makers risk becoming inward looking and the community being indifferent to its activities.

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Communication-of-decision-making/365916-48088cardano.ideascale.com

F6: NFT Business models

$200,000 in ada

What non-Art use cases of NFTs can distinguish Cardano as the blockchain of choice for NFT based businesses?

8) Auditability of NFT Business models

https://cardano.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Auditability-of-NFT-Business-models/365792-48088?submitted=1cardano.ideascale.com

Description

To succeed NFT Business models need to assure their customers and clients of their own quality, reliance, robustness, and track-record.

To achieve this outcome any NFT Business model proposal should be ready to demonstrate:

A transparent legal status that assures customers and clients of liabilities and where responsibility lies for business delivery.

A clear commitment to Cardano values (as the blockchain of choice) of connectedness, transparency, and fairness.

A well-documented, maintained and tracked system of governance. So that clients and customers may have a clear understanding of why, when, and how business decisions are made.

An unambiguous apportion of intellectual property so that clients and customers know their data is safe.