Community Review & Fund Operations AMA
IOG Catalyst Team host an AMA to address questions the community has about their F10 Fund Operations proposal.
Last updated
Was this helpful?
IOG Catalyst Team host an AMA to address questions the community has about their F10 Fund Operations proposal.
Last updated
Was this helpful?
IOG Catalyst Team host an AMA to address questions the community has about their F10 Fund Operations proposal.
Nigel Hemsley - Head of Catalyst Governance
Kriss Baird - Product Manager - Catalyst
Daniel Ribar - Catalyst Community Manager (Facilitation)
Steven Johnston - Lead Architect - Catalyst
Timestamps (QADAO) ----------------
(Pause in Treasury ?)
(Training of Cardano dReps, part of Bootstrap period design)
(Level of IOG Catalyst Team competency, development of competition, first funding period challenge is continuity)
(Fund operation funded same way as projects)
(Operation or business ?)
(Constrained by funding rules to apply in 1 fund)
(Set out reasonable costs of 3% per fund)
(NB - Total F10 Budget = 50m ADA - 3% =1.5m ADA)
(NB - Total Cost per Fund Period of 4 months: ₳2,140,000 )
(Annual review position is reasonable)
(Level of detail demonstrates transparency)
(Never going to get it perfect)(Identifying improvements)
(Challenge stipulates annual plan)
(Challenge tied to single funding round)
(In hindsight a clearer description that levels the Challenge more)
(No level playing field)
(Everyone has to pitch in a proposal the same way) (No guarantee of payoff)
(incumbent advantage)(F10 handover not realistically possible)
(If you do not vote for us you walk into uncertainty)
(Do not "blackmail" the community)
(Open up operations to the community )
(Transition from "free" to funded service)(to a successful business)
(Sustainable & secure treasury access)
(Definitely something people can compete with)
NB - Contradiction (Requires similar competency to Catalyst)
(4 workshops planned)
(Accountability, Metrics)
(Alternatives too risky)
(As an additional step)
(Might have to download 2 funds in 1 round)
(Work through as Voltaire progresses)
(Building competition)(Any leeway ?)
(Planned for F11 ?)
(Risk assessment on transition ?)
(only one beneficiary = Cardano community)(avoid small treasury withdrawals)
(Asset management)(Money only used to fund Catalyst innovation)(Smoother operational setup)
(Dependent on jurisdiction of where Catalyst Trust is setup)
(Nothing special in terms of risk assessment)
(Fallback plans for delivery ?)
(Managing upside and downside)(draw down from Catalyst Development Trust)
(Funding from other VCs)
(Community involvement in fund operations)
(Deterioration of grassroots community over last 6 months)(Volunteering is expensive)
(accessibility of technology stack)(sustainability of services)
(partners in process)
(IOG sense checking role)(Long process)
(NB - Agile approach)
(Email address registration causes GDPR responsibilities)(Wallet registration sought in the future).
(Avoiding custody of data also reason to exit Ideascale)
(Role based access control)
F10 Catalyst Fund Operations proposal -
Extended documentation -
Issue Board for this proposal -
Introduction - Daniel Ribar -
What happens if the proposal does not get funded ? - Joey -
Will be a pause during 1694 Hard Fork - Nigel Hemsley -
Competitive footing -
Will IOG funding stop ? - Joey -
Yes - Catalyst becomes self sustaining from Cardano - Nigel Hemsley -
Operations Challenge Strategy - Tevo -
Existing operation needs to know what funding looks like over 1 year - Nigel Hemsley -
Pitch for a year - to scale up takes time -
Why not describe that situation in the Challenge setting ? - Tevo -
Could have been an oversight - Nigel -
Benefit of hindsight - Daniel -
Kudos to 9 fund operation - Thorsten -
New funding situation - Thorsten -
Assume that everyone is working hard - Thorsten -
Using stage of main Town Hall - Thorsten -
Not a collaborative approach to say if proposal not funded "its all over" - Thorsten -
Other people do not have the same stage - Thorsten -
Consensus on success of Catalyst - Thorsten -
F11 and F12 opportunities - Thorsten -
Cannot answer all of that - Nigel -
IOG will ask why do this for free - Nigel -
Inclusion - setup already includes community suppliers - Nigel -
CIP 1694 direction - Nigel -
Difficult for people to compete - Nigel -
Achieve competition over next year - Nigel -
Carving up Catalyst - Nigel -
Catalyst Team want to run operations for other chains - Nigel -
Need for continuity in F10 - Thorsten -
Leveling playing field in F11 & F12 - Thorsten -
A year to achieve that - Nigel -
Stability more important than change - Thorsten -
Importance of a commitment to enabling competition - Thorsten -
Make a category in F11 to train people up - Nigel -
Upcoming F11 categorization workshops - Daniel -
Cooperation and co-building in the Catalyst Systems Improvement Challenge - Daniel -
Meaningful collaboration in Catalyst Systems Improvements - Steven Johnson -
How to approach assessment stage ? - Jorge -
Do not be afraid to voice your opinions - Daniel -
50 million in a single transaction - Lloyd -
Catalyst Operations proposal step in right direction - Lloyd -
Voting for 150 million ADA being returned to the community - Lloyd -
Vote of confidence - Lloyd -
Internal disagreement on timing of F10 - Nigel -
Community decides whether they want 3 funds in next year - Nigel -
3 questions - Lloyd -
1 - Will there be a Voltaire vote for Catalyst ? - Lloyd -
Allocate F10 then figure out the other funding rounds - Nigel -
CIP-1694 Bootstrap period - Nigel -
Uncertainty going into Voltaire - Lloyd -
2 - When will next years competition take place ? - Lloyd -
Any operator should have minimum year funding - Nigel -
Next proposal category may specify handover - Nigel -
Categorical elements, breaking things up - Lloyd -
3 - Funding of Working groups ? - Lloyd -
Build out from basic infrastructure - Kriss Baird -
Structural transition plan ? - Stephen W -
1 - Legal Clarity / 2 - Catalyst Funding Vehicle & Team / 3 - Service Level Agreement -
Draw down a fund to hold in a legal vehicle - Nigel -
Contractual separation based on proposal acceptance ? - Stephen W -
Client account analogy - Nigel -
Who will draft service level agreement ? - Stephen W -
Legal counsel will require degree of independence - Nigel -
Risk assessment for the transition ? - Stephen W -
Only in the way we manage operations currently - Nigel -
Currency risk ? - Stephen W -
Same currency risk as everyone - Nigel -
Use of any surplus profit ? - Stephen W -
Re calibrate the next fund - Nigel -
Most important thing to work on in the next 12 months ? - Simon -
Consistent funding - Nigel -
Cross over with CIP 1694 funding -
Improve community interaction -
Sustaining grassroots networks - Daniel -
Lowering barriers to entry - Steven -
Assembly line analogy - Joey -
Confidence in funding -
Replacement of Ideascale -
Assistance with testing - Nigel -
Recruit from community - Steven -
Will milestone process apply ? - Thorsten -
Independent oversight of milestones - Daniel -
Contingency for expansion ? - Thorsten -
Evaluate and respond - Nigel -
Evaluate and respond if bigger operation required - Nigel -
Data Licensing - Darlington -
Open Source solution - Nigel -
Encrypted data - Darlington -
GDPR Limits - Steven -
Data liabilities - Daniel -
Interoperability of data - Steven -
Short term concerns - Darlington -
Catalyst System Improvement context - Steven -
Operational fiduciary detail - Darlington -
We can look into that - Nigel -
Open community involvement in process- Darlington -
Decentralised authorsation - Steven -
Decentralised UX - Steven -
Co-creation not in milestones ?- Darlington -
Data migration - Steven -
Category scoping workshops - Quasar -
4 biweekly workshops - Daniel -
