Pre-requisite reading: Aligning on narrative and high level direction
Suggestion in 1Hive Garden: Proposal #72
It’s been a while since Luke made the above call to the community to try and establish a shared vision for 1Hive going forward. There wasn’t a great deal of response to his call and since then the value of Honey has continued to diminish and contributors have continued to leave or become inactive. Considering this and the increasing fragmentation of 1Hive into many unrelated projects and self-governed swarms, some change is necessary if 1Hive is not only interested in surviving but also thriving.
From the beginning 1Hive was always about building and experimenting with inclusive organisational infrastructure. The core of this infrastructure is now represented as Gardens and Celeste. These are the necessary components for continuing this grand experiment. Without them 1Hive has very little future. There are many swarms within 1Hive that support these applications and there are many that, although promising and useful in their own ways, do not.
Considering the limited resources we currently have available I think it’s paramount that as a community we refocus our attention on these core applications until we’re in a more sustainable position. A sustainable position is one where Honey is a desirable asset and the best chance we have at making that the case is by popularising whatever requires Honey to use. Celeste requires dispute creators to pay for those disputes in Honey and users of Gardens (which cost Honey to deploy) are incentivised to stake to Celeste to potentially have a say in disputes that arrise. Ultimately Celeste is the most likely to create the biggest demand for Honey, since users of any applications that rely on it are incentivised to want to be involved in potential disputes which requires they stake Honey to it.
Current efforts to make Celeste more widely used include Gardens (including a Garden involving Maroon5’s NFT’s), Quests, and a developing collaboration with Gitcoin. We have also explored integrating with Gnosis Omen and building a function naming registry in the past. Beyond this it has been suggested we liase with other DAO’s or crowdsale platforms to see how we can integrate Celeste into their processes. If we can establish applications that rely on Celeste and are used regularly we will create a sustainable demand for Honey.
Gardens and Celeste have a unique advantage relative to our competitors and if we put in the effort there is a chance we can maintain this advantage and have our platform become a significantly more popular approach to building and maintaining organisations.
Tulip was a great experiment but unfortunately it wasn’t able to mature quick enough to compete with established defi projects with which it provided an almost identical experience. It ultimately created very little return and efforts to reestablish it haven’t been successful. Unless there’s clear evidence that suggests funding Tulip will generate a return then it shouldn’t receive further funding.
Anyone working on or hoping to work on Tulip should consider joining the Gardens and Celeste channels to see where they can help out. There are many marketing, engineering and design tasks.
See the the latest Tulip proposal for current discussion.
We have an Issuance process that constantly pumps out Honey but that doesn’t mean we have an infinite amount of money. Unfortunately we don’t have the resources (money or man power) right now to support projects that aren’t explicitly creating a demand for Honey. Ofcourse the Honey distribution created through the support of unrelated projects in the past is largely what has made this community what it is, and one day soon it would be great to return to that, but not until 1Hive is in a sustainable financial position.
In the mean time we should raise the minimum threshold for passing proposals in the 1Hive Garden. This will have the effect of reducing fragmentation in the community and encouraging a more explicit focus on the smaller set of applications discussed above. Proposals will also increase in quality and require more consensus. This will also reduce governance overhead by the wider community as more decisions will be delegated to swarms. Specific values will be discussed in a separate post.
There has been a lot of issues keeping contributors due to lower than average pay. We should increase payments to individuals in swarms made in Honey by some amount (perhaps ~25% but open to discussion) but also establish a vesting process for payments in Honey that all swarms are happy to subscribe to. This will encourage consistent contributions that attempt to provide value. The approach taken to creating a vesting process will be discussed in a separate post.
Our dream is to make 1Hive a sustainable and thriving ecosystem that provides people with the tools necessary to enable them to provide the value they have to the world in a sustainable way. In building 1Hive we have experimented with being an open and inclusive community that encourages projects from all different domains to build with us. Now it is time to prioritise projects that are explicitly focussed on creating a sustainable demand for Honey, at least until Honey is clearly in demand and the contributor base is reestablished. In other words, this is a call to all 1Hive contributors to focus on projects that will explicitly generate a return in the short to medium term.
Please share your thoughts and consider staking to this suggestion in the 1Hive Garden and we will attempt to refine this short to medium term vision. Alternatively consider forking this proposal and creating a separate signalling proposal as suggested in Luke’s original post.