Pollen Distribution period starting May 17

Pollen Distribution period starting May 17

proposal link: Honey Pot

Proposal Information

This is a follow up to fund the pollen swarm again, you can find the previous post outlining the pollen experiment here: New pollen proposal for period starting April 12 .

We are currently using a usd peg of $20k / week up 30 HNY. I propose 4 weeks of funding at 30 HNY / week.

We recently added celeste repos to pollen. In the near future, maybe the next proposal, we would like to add Agave repos, the agave discord, as well as the tulip discord servers to pollen. This addition may warrant a higher weekly distribution. I would like to discuss that here for the following proposal, and what that budget should look like. For now we will still with the same, as those changes have not been made yet.

What duration should this proposal have?

The proposal will have last about 4 weeks, although the funds may last longer due to the usd peg. We do have some back payments as well though, as we were short about 7 HNY this most recent distribution, and so were not able to withdraw all previously distributed HNY (we pushed the last budget a little to 5 weeks rather than 4).

Team Information (For Funding Proposals)

Funding will go directly to the pollen multisig for distributions. The multisig is currently controlled by @befitsandpiper, @lkngtn, @luigy, @sem, @Rayne, @Jasper, @crisog, @Felix, @hernandoagf

Skills and previous experience in related or similar work:
This proposal is an extension of previous work the above members have been managing

Funding Information (For Funding Proposals)
120 HNY

Ethereum address where funds shall be transferred:
0x94726a37ee00308dbead364eb3d2e10d366949f4 (pollen multisig agent address)

More detailed description of how funds will be handled and used:
all distributions will be done through the Aragon pollen multisig, and will be voted on by the above mentioned members, or any other members later added to the multisig.


I’m now a team member also @befitsandpiper ;).


I am in favour of adding the Agave server and repos to the pollen distro for now, but I think it is important to also talk about if at some point Agave would become its own entity with its own SourceCred instance. If so what would the criteria be to consider it developed enough to warrant this move. If not then I think it is important to understand how Agave is different from the other projects in the ecosystem. This will become particularly important once Gardens is launched and we start onboarding/launching new projects through that framework. Should all GardenDAOs be supported by Pollen?


I don’t think Agave should have its own SourceCred instance. AGVE is a fixed supply token, so not a good fit for SourceCred. Also, it’s a lot of overhead to have a whole new instance. Personally I’m not interested in maintaining a 2nd instance at all. It’s also still a part of the 1hive ecosystem, and in a way just a 1hive swarm with more expansive internal structure than most.

Agave has a revenue connection to 1hive, so providing pollen to agave makes sense cos it’s a virtuous cycle. Revenue from the Agave platform should scale faster than payments from pollen. Pollen is not a perfectly fixed expense, but ideally it would be a shrinking expense as a percent of the HNY supply.

I wouldn’t say all GardenDAOs should be supported by pollen. It depends on the relation to 1hive. If it provides a similar revenue flow to 1hive then it could be considered a “1hive project” probably then pollen would make more sense and it would be tied to the inner 1hive community. More casual connections between projects(even if they use the GardenDAO structure) probably shouldn’t be funded through pollen.

It’s hard to make clear policies around this though without more examples. I think we should think about this on a more case by case basis until clear patterns emerge.


full support for this proposal, and congratulations to the entire team for their great work! :white_check_mark:

So many good things to vote for, not enough HNY! :-\

I guess when this was debated in another forum post (topic of AGAVE and other similar future projects and how they may dilute pollen distro as the community grows), there was discussion on whether there should also be a direct contribution from AGAVE to the 1Hive source cred system. But I guess without actual analytics on how the pollen distro is being impacted (if at all), I agree that the projects close to 1Hive should typically be incentivized by Pollen. In saying that if the pollen distro does not provide the right level of incentive for new beez to be around and contribute, then we may have to consider other DAOs projects to also directly incentivize the Pollen distro.

I don’t think having a fixed supply really matters when it comes to deciding whether to use SourceCred at all. To me, it would just make sense for less to be distributed each week, and that amount can always scale down as time goes on (assuming the value of Agave goes up). Similar to how Pollen now pegs the HNY distro to the USD value.

Again I am not suggesting that we create a separate SourceCred instance for Agave right now. I am just interested in clearly understanding why Agave should be supported by Pollen indefinitely, or if the idea is that at some point it will be able to support itself with its own SourceCred instance. And if so, what are the criteria for that.

I am also not suggesting that you be responsible for managing the Agave SourceCred instance @befitsandpiper .
There is a post up now discussing that work is being done to automate a lot of the SourceCred work, which should make your current job easier, and should also make it easier for other people to lend a hand as well as (potentially) run a separate Agave instance much easier.

A major reason why I feel Agave could use its own SourceCred instance though is because the only way to earn Agave right now (besides being on the swarm payroll), would be to earn Honey and sell it for Agave. Which puts sell pressure on Honey and buy pressure on Agave. This benefits those that already hold Agave, and may not benefit those that hold Honey unless the revenue kickback does in fact outpace the Pollen expense plus the selling pressure, but this is yet to be seen. There are currently 4188 holders of Agave but still, we are seeing a poor turnout for votes. There are less than 100 people on the Discord server, and even less than that contribute.

I just feel like there should be a better way for those that contribute to earn Agave for participating in the community, this will get more tokens into the hands of the people that care and who will turn up to vote.

I guess what I am saying is that I am less interested in having a dedicated SourceCred Agave instance and more interested in getting Agave into the hands of those that contribute and are willing to participate in governance. Although I do see SourceCred as a good way of doing that, If there were another mechanism to do this though I would be interested in talking about that.


I also think the division of labor has a serious impact on improving performance

I totally agree with you, there are people really interested in contributing and participating in the growth of agve, doing the best they know how to do for the project and the ideal would be agve would have its earnings separately, without the need for the user who owns Hny to sell to get agve! it is my mild opinion


I’m currently against adding Agave repos and their Discord to the 1Hive Pollen instance and agree with the reasons stated by @CurlyBracketEffect.

I’m also unsure if we should add the Tulip Discord as it’s an invite only server.

30 HNY comes to more than $20k so at about $820 per HNY we will be paying out ~25 HNY per week, is that correct or are you suggesting increasing the payout to 30 HNY?

1 Like

I’m also against adding Agave (mostly concerned about Discord) to Pollen. The reasons are the same stated by @CurlyBracketEffect, but besides that, in Discord particularly, I’ve seen single messages with over 70 reactions and that would certainly be really unfair for people helping & participating in 1Hive discord where this is not as common. Even if more HNY is put towards the distribution, that won’t solve this issue.


messages with 70 reacts? You mean like announcements? These would not count for cred, and the minting roles and discord weights would be set up similar to 1hive’s discord, a number of channels would also have zero weights such as the info channels.

it’s pegged to $20k / week, up to a max of 30 HNY. We only pay out based on the usd peg. This is no different than the last several proposals.

So… from this I’m gathering that we don’t want to include Agave in pollen then? Should I retract my feature request by SourceCred to allow multiple discord servers in an instance?

I thought this made sense from a community incentives perspective, since we have been splitting the community into a number of different discord servers now. I guess to me it seems strange to have pollen on the 1hive server but not others as we continue to expand and split out swarms into their own separate servers.

But I also see the point around invite-only servers. The tulip swarm server is not particularly exclusive. We can consider it kind of an extension of the idea behind swarm channels. But maybe we should rethink how we permission these things as we continue this move for more swarms in the future.

1 Like

So to clarify you will be paying out the HNY value of $20k at the time? Or 30 Honey if it’s less?

I believe the $ cap cap was lower before so I’m checking that this is still the expected calculation and so others are aware of exactly how much will be paid out.

yeah, that’s correct. It also was lower usd I think 3 months back or so, but the HNY cap was higher at the time.

So I think we are talking about a couple of different things here:

  1. Swarms that have their own servers being incentivized by Pollen
  2. A GardenDAO that started as a swarm (but now has its own token) being incentivized by Pollen

I don’t see a problem with incentivizing Discord discussion on swarm servers that are building up aspects of the 1Hive ecosystem. It would make sense to me for these servers to be open to the public in true DAO fashion though. In this case, it would be useful to have multiple Discord servers to feed into one SourceCred instance. So, I think you should keep the request open. Although, if we really wanted to be granular about it, a Swarm could have their own instance and still get funding for it through 1Hive proposals requesting Honey. I think that might be overkill at this point, but it would give a more robust way of budgeting and allocating funds to different areas of the Hive. It would also make it so that folks that are working in a particular swarm don’t feel like their work is being overshadowed /being weighted unfairly against other “more popular” topics. Once the Pollen automation tools are ready this would likely be a lot more feasible.

If a swarm is working on a project that ends up creating its own token like Agave and soon other Garden DAOs, it makes sense to me that we strongly consider encouraging those projects to build their own SourceCred instance. Particularly if the token is used for voting, I believe there needs to be a way for the most active community members to earn voting power by engaging in constructive conversation and providing meaningful code contributions. In this case, it would be useful to have a separate SourceCred instance. Agave would still be free to create a proposal to have 1Hive provide HNY to the project if the community believed that it is still in need of support, but I really think it is in the best interest of both projects to encourage the Garden to build a stronger token economy by incentivizing its contributors from its own coffers.


I fully agree with your assessment, in particular I see Agave taking giant steps, it would be ideal if they at least had the notion of building their own sourcred instance.

and the active agave community have the subtlety to discuss constructively for the benefit of the project would be the ideal thing to advance even further!

good vibes @CurlyBracketEffect

I will say, having multiple SourceCred servers imo is a bit of a dealbreaker. This would mean individuals would have much different scores on different instances, and have to reestablish themselves. It would mean needing several people who can manage a SourceCred instance, it would also make the Agave Payday lending proposal with SourceCred nearly impossible in the near term.

Maybe there is a compromise that can be made where some additional agave is sent to the 1hive DAO on a weekly basis or something in exchange for being added to the 1hive SC instance? I really think having 1 instance that pays out to the ecosystem as a whole is the best path forward until SourceCred dependencies and linking instances together is more robust and intuitive, and maintaining an instance isn’t so time consuming and unintuitive.