Gardens Swarm Funding Proposal #4 🌻

Proposal Information

This proposal will be used to fund the development of Gardens v2. And continue the efforts of the Grow team of Gardens.

Proposal description
This proposal will fund the Gardens Swarm Gnosis Safe.

Proposal Rationale
Gardens is working on the generalization of the DAO design of 1Hive. The proposal will allow continuing the development we started with our first, second, and third proposals.

We keep track of the hours and funds spent during this time in the following document: Gardens Hours.

The artifacts we worked on during the last few months were:

Next steps

Link to proposal vote :ballot_box:

Gardens Swarm Funding Proposal #4 :sunflower:

Related documents

Expected duration or delivery date
2 months to continue with phase two.

Team Information (For Funding Proposals)

Swarm multisig members with equal weight in control of funds:

@willjgriff @rperez89 @fabriv @gabi @paul @twells @sem

Swarm members roles and resposabilities .

Funding Information (For Funding Proposals)

Amount of HNY requested:

Ethereum address where funds shall be transferred:
Gardens Swarm DAO Agent: 0xc542cc61ed9be9e6e29652ac8a918554ecd2bc98

More detailed description of how funds will be handled and used:
50 HNY will be used to reimburse payments made on the last two sprints.

Payments will be made in HNY at the $ value at the time of the hours completed, once every 2 weeks.

With the data we gather during the last few months, we expect a burning rate of $17k/month for the whole team to function. We are requesting enough funds for a runway of 2 months + reimbursement.


Current release notes should include discussion of making the site quicker by refining the libraries used and the migration to TS in various areas.

Future release should also reference the inclusion of the delegated voting UI and general bug fixing. We should also consider spending some time user testing the UI to find all the bugs. I come across many and I think with greater usage they’ll become more apparent.

1 Like

This requires further investigation. For new NFT projects that we can have modify their NFT contracts before deployment, to hook into conviction voting, could work fine. However, for existing NFT projects, to do everything on chain as we currently do, users will have to transfer their NFT to the Garden in order to gain governance rights. It’s unlikely users will be that compelled to do this since their NFT’s will no longer be visible on their opensea account or elsewhere.


Is this just Gardens with a bonding curve/ICO mechanism? I think we should hear from @lkngtn if that’s the case before committing to something like this because part of the reason we built Gardens the way we did was to mitigate the risk of legal issues that arise from those kinds of mechanisms.

1 Like

Quests doesn’t need to be integrated into the Gardens UI. In fact it’s probably more user friendly to keep it separate and we will need an independent UI for Quests either way. I would propose that any funds or dev time dedicated to this in the Gardens swarm be put to use finalising and refining the current Quests UI.

1 Like

Thanks for the general feedback Will, I included it in the proposal. About the commons Gardens, I’ll wait to have further discussions before we consider it on the roadmap.

100% agree with some help :innocent:

Sneaky Vampire Syndicate did something unique, they created a contract that mints a “ghost” version of their Ethereum NFT on Polygon anytime someone stakes their NFT. It also burns the ghost NFT when you unstake. That could be an option if the NFT must leave the wallet to gain governance rights.

Here’s the Ghost Vamp contract: Contract Address 0x1e80fab8ed55d9dc7be4173a6af30ae06cec8ae6 | PolygonScan
And the Ghost Bat contract: Contract Address 0x99f7c94867724469e42f77c8118138bbc0e46c74 | PolygonScan

1 Like

That’s an interesting idea. We could mint a separate NFT when a user wraps that allows the owner to unlock the original NFT in the Garden. This NFT would be registered with marketplaces like the original and they could have a placeholder visual representation (or maybe even connect it up to the original visual representation if the community is comfortable with it). It would also have custom onTransfer functionality which would ensure that if it’s moved between accounts any voting power moves with it.

It’s similar to how we require wrapping existing tokens to gain governance rights currently for byot Gardens, we would effectively do the same with NFT’s but allow them to be transferrable.

1 Like